Occasionally I simply sit down and write, this is one of those occasions.
Brits of a certain age will know who del Boy Trotter is and also his Reliant Robin 3 wheeler, Bright Yellow, or perhaps a fading yellow with London Paris and Peckham painted on the rear van Panels.
There is another Reliant Robin currently getting another bunch of Spivs into trouble. On the side of this 3 wheeler is written, Vatican City, District of Columbia and The City of London. Those who know something of the International order will recognise those 3 City-States and what they represent in the Liberal Political Order that has dominated the second half of the 20th and first 20 years of the 21st Century.
Del Boy trotter is a loveable rogue, the rogues of the 3 city-states are far from loveable, Hold that thought.
Jeremy Corbyn I have described this past week as a human 9/11, this is what we should believe about Mr Corbyn by all accounts in our various media and social media feeds. The Message has been writ large as if of such moment as a promise of 350 million quid a week for the NHS. On close examination the public is finding that Mr Corbyn is not nearly as wicked as the 3 City States, 3 wheeler jockeys, would have us believe. To many of us Mr Corbyn may be annoying, PC and even smug. The sort of Left-Wing do-gooder that gets up the noses of those who wish simply to get on with their own business without being told how to think, when to think and what to think. If we all think very carefully though it seems clear that Mr Corbyn is a mere amateur in the virtue signalling thought policing authoritarian, you must do it like this stakes.
I think Mr Corbyn is a virtuous ( in the best greek sense) man endowed with what the Greeks used to call Arette. Not being a 3 city State slogan pedlar, he is, of course, to be vilified, by all and any means. The efforts of those wishing to Smear Mr Corbyn are of course not made difficult by some of the Fringe causes ( for them) that he is prepared to advocate for. I have looked and found nothing to suggest that Mr Corbyn is a violent man or advocates Violence, those he has associated with are or have been very violent but their support, Financial and media-wise, seems to have come for the whole part from those 3 city-state stenographers and their sponsors, not from the Wicked Mr Corbyn. We should reflect and ask ourselves what exactly is going on here, The Cap so carefully crafted for Mr Corbyn to wear seems not to fit, and yet seems made to measure for the very people who tell us all of Mr Corbyn’s Crimes and Misdemeanors, Ironically it seems these crimes are of the Thoughtcrime variety and certainly fall into the species of accusation known to Psychologists as Projections.
What of Mr Corbyn’s critics and political opponents in the Current Stalking horse and show pony stakes? Mr Johnson is certainly accused of actual Violent conspiracy with his old Bullingdon Chum, Darius Guppy. More seriously perhaps his Joint efforts with John Kerry at the UN, when he bore all his deep and insincere “Unger” at the UNGA. Boris the spaffel de Brino was also an enthusiastic supporter of the Clinton/Kerry Libyan Intervention.
What of say, Caroline Lucas? who seems to be given a pass for her Loony Greeny Lefty feminazi excesses, because after all, our house is on fire? Who is really the Stalinist Commissar? Lucas or Corbyn? To be fair to Lucas she too voted against the Libyan intervention but her Green party has been rather less consistent on the issue of Regime Change shenanigans in Syria.
What of Ms Swinson, Swinson is best compared to Clare short, both have a dynamic breathing presence beloved of those of us that like to wait for the fat lady to sing. Yet Short and Swinson sing a very different song. Clare shorts tune seems to me to be more in Key with Mr Corbyn’s, not so Ms Swinsons. Swinson an MP at 25, with a perfect show pony cv, a supporter enthusiastically for all the Neoliberal excessive exuberance of the Cameron/Osborne Girly Swot of Uber Thatcher milk snatching.
Complete the line up from last nights debate, the essential Welsh Windbag, de rigueur for the UK political palette, The Cranky from the SNP soon to be redubbed the SNSP ( Scottish National Socialist Party ) and of course the Tim Nice but not as dim as all that, Tice of the Brexit Corporation inc. An ACME for the new technocratic Feudalism of the Faragistas, a cuddly breed of fascist claiming Liberty as theirs as a snake oil salesman claims to sell the only “Soothing Medicament” suitable to combat the 3 city-state speaker John Bercow, happily now gone off to the Inter-Parliamentary firmament of shadow world government.
For me, I am left with the wish that Corbyn was a Bakuninite Anarchist and not some sort of Gramscian/Trot. Especially as I strongly suspect O’Donnell of being something of an unrepentant Stalinist, ready to deliver the ice pick into the temple of Corbyn after he serves his Stalking horse purpose.
Stepford Corbyn has much less of the new car smell of 2017 for me, he is more in the odour of a beat-up old Hillman imp, some say Trabant. Of course, I would prefer he had the Whiff of an old Rover V8 the sort that delivered Thatcher to no 10 in 1979, altogether more stately than the Spivy Jag which Bojo lounges in the back of.
But Back to the Reliant robin.
3 wheels on his wagon but he keeps rolling along those Cherokees are after he but he keeps singing his song.
“Get Brino done”.
You see Brino, is what Boris is trying to serve up. Corbyn is a real Brexiteer
In terms of getting out from under the Dodgy old reliant robin dressed up as an Executive “Brino coach” and into something more of an old Rover P5B, Proper Brexit
I have come to the conclusion that Mr Corbyn is the Best Bet. and I am a full English Brexit Patriot, all be it an anarchist, and we anarchists really do not like Trots.
The BBC has been spinning the Tory inevitability, the Telegraph is more honest with its Poll of polls analysis this morning with a projected BoJo Majority of 8 seats down from 68. The Gap is closing as it did in 2017.
The Gap closes another London Bridge, Dom Cummings Bat-signal, and For the Corbyn P5B, The Waspi Promise, and the Regional Manifestos. The Regional Manifestos I think are feared most of all by the tories. They tried that in Wells, where the Absentee Show Pony MP used a Welsh Conservative Blurb in Wells. If you’re posh they are kind of pronounced the same, but its a useful metaphor for how the Tory’s see Norf of Watford. West of Heathrow, East of Canary Wharf and Sarf of Blackheath.
Mange Tout Rodders Mange TouT, Toute alors no joggy jiggy tres bon.
On London Bridge. It was noticeable that 3 of the Civilian Heroes are actually wearing Military issue Pea Jackets, there is an air of Death on the Rock in the demeanour of several of the Alarmingly calm gentlemen around the fringes. The Para-Military Police Guys Obviously had a Job to do. What though were either The SBS or SAS doing there?
It may well be that Intelligence put our best guys on the spot and thank goodness for that, the show biz aspects of it do however speak to a PR opportunity to COnvene the COBRA committee. More to See here I think To Wit.
The Tweet that this followed was an obviously Fake Tweet form Jeremy Corbyn stating, Police Murder Man in Broad Daylight. It was so obviously photoshopped, I did not take a screen Cap, unfortunately.
Pea coats are cold-weather naval-issue garments. They were originally made using thick, coarse pilot cloth. This is the origin of the name of the coat. Pilot cloth became abbreviated to “P-cloth” and from there the coats themselves became known as “pea coats.” Pea coats have become an enduring fashion item and many fashion clothing manufacturers have created coats based on the regulation pea coat design. If you want an authentic US Navy pea coat, there are certain things you should look for to assure yourself of a coat’s authenticity.
Maria Healey/Demand Media
Search for an authentic pea coat at a military surplus store
A pea coat (or peacoat, pea jacket, pilot jacket, reefer jacket) is an outer coat, generally of a navy-coloured heavy wool,[1] originally worn by sailors of European and later Americannavies.[2] Pea coats are characterized by short length, broad lapels, double-breasted fronts, often large wooden, metal or plastic buttons, and vertical or slash pockets.[3] References to the pea jacket appear in American newspapers at least as early as the 1720s,[4] and modern renditions still maintain the original design and composition.[1]
A bridge coat is a pea coat that extends to the thighs, and is a uniform exclusively for officers and chief petty officers. The reefer jacket is for officers[5] and chief petty officers only, and is identical to the basic design but usually has gold buttons and epaulettes. Only officers wear the epaulettes.[2]
1. Usman Khan Had a Prior Terrorism Conviction & Connections to ‘Islamist Terror Groups,’ Reports Say
Twitter/@HLOBlogThe London Bridge attack video shows a hero bystander with a knife after disarming the suspect (left) and police shooting the suspect (right.)
The Telegraph reported that the suspect had a prior terrorism conviction he was on a “tag” for and had connections to “Islamist terror groups.”
The Military Industrial Complex and Brexit. A hypothesis. #EUMilitaryUnification #Brexit #Brino…
Brexit is not a stand-alone or binary question I have commented before that Brexit is about an emperor and the battle for supremacy between two Eunuchs charged with looking after his harem. …
Brexit is not a stand-alone or binary question I have commented before that Brexit is about an emperor and the battle for supremacy between two Eunuchs charged with looking after his harem.
This Global Governance question seems missing againfrom the present discourse on Section 50, the context is much wider than the UK divorcing the EU, this is not a mere Marriage or even a menage a trios breaking up, this is more akin to a polygamous harem of the Ottoman Sultans involving some sort of internecine struggle between two of his, arguably high to middle-ranking eunuchs, for more recognition or status.
The Military-Industrial Complex and Brexit. A hypothesis.
#EUMilitaryUnification
The film suggests a plausible motive for a highly organised plot to remove Jo Cox from her position of MP. Her departure occurred just one week before the UK Brexit referendum and the film explains why this may have happened.
A similar Assassination took place in Sweden in another EU referendum campaign in 2003 of Anna Lindh, there are of course then question going back to the Assassination of Olof Palme and of Course JFK? Brexit is a Geo-Political Event and TINA will be obeyed.
Last Night in Lambeth there was another terrorist attack perpetrated by Islamicist Terrorists, whilst no claims were made immediately for responsibility it is clear that this Attack was claimed for the extremist Wahhabi Islamist Jihadist ideology, which is exported from Saudi Arabi via proxy´s in several North African and Middle Eastern wars.
Shortly after the first news reports started to emerge
the Telegraph newspaper and several celebrities whose accounts are monitored by the BBC´s Live News Feed team
called for a postponement of the General Election on the
8th of June.
Screen Capture from BBC
In considering such calls it is as well to remember the words from Kipling’s Poem Dane Geld.
"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that pays it is lost!"
Danegeld video
Whilst all people will stand in solidarity against the barbarous and cowardly attack, we should Hold our political leaders and institutions to account and those of our deep state Intelligence services.
Alex Thomson – An Infernal Convergence At AV 9.1, the speakers exposed the course of the plans which broke surface in the 1970’s, to sell off all public assets and to replace common-law representative democracy with the corporatist and third-sector stitch-up of “participational democracy”. In his contribution, building on his AV9 talk on the history of cabals and cartels, Alex Thomson will outline his understanding of how we reached this nadir and how not one but two major streams of élitists are responsible. Inspired loosely by the philosophies of Aristotle and of Plato respectively, these two persuasions of purloining bloodline élitists and their technocratic hangers-on have been wrestling over the juicy prize of Britain and our diaspora for at least three centuries. (In a nutshell, the Aristotelians justify their rule by reference to religious notions and the Platonists do so by promising prosperity.) Or this From Frankie Goes to Hollywood.
The more I look at the unfolding Jamboree the more I am Convinced that Knowingly or not both Bojo and Jezzer are Stalking horses for the Establishments preferred Democratic Show Ponies, The Likes of Ummana, Hunt and David Milliband. Always bearing in mind the Puppet Master Sedwill.
“A beastly ambition, which the gods grant thee t’ attain to! If thou wert the lion, the fox would beguile thee; if thou wert the lamb, the fox would eat three: if thou wert the fox, the lion would suspect thee, when peradventure thou wert accused by the ass: if thou wert the ass, thy dullness would torment thee, and still thou livedst but as a breakfast to the wolf: if thou wert the wolf, thy greediness would afflict thee, and oft thou shouldst hazard thy life for thy dinner: wert thou the unicorn, pride and wrath would confound thee and make thine own self the conquest of thy fury: wert thou a bear, thou wouldst be killed by the horse: wert thou a horse, thou wouldst be seized by the leopard: wert thou a leopard, thou wert german to the lion and the spots of thy kindred were jurors on thy life: all thy safety were remotion and thy defence absence. What beast couldst thou be, that were not subject to a beast? and what a beast art thou already, that seest not thy loss in transformation!” ― William Shakespeare, Timon of Athens
“The passion for freedom dieth not.” “ legend has it that after the bloody battle of Thermopylae, the victor Xerxes prepared to spread a purple cloak over the body of his vanquished enemy Leonidas, out of admiration for his valour. But as he was about to lower the cloak, a strange voice out of nowhere called out: “No. Take that cloak from me. I will accept no favour from the Persians.” And Xerxes knew that it was Leonidas, speaking to him from the other world. And he called out into space: “But thou art dead, Leonidas. Why hate the Persians even in death?” And, according to the legend, back came the stirring reply: “The passion for freedom dieth not.” Al Smith’s passion for freedom did not die with him. It is ours to nurture today. May we all be true to that great legacy.”
“ Roy Madron the author of Gaian Democracies and whose new book I have done some proofreading on and can not wait to read when published ( ‘Super-SmartDemocracies: Dissolving Neoliberalism, Managerialism and Elitism’. ) calls the new kind of democracy super competent here is his Article on
Look at the attached engraving and consider this on paradigm shifts.
“Cynics saw what people could be and were angered by what they had become; Timonists felt humans were hopelessly stupid & uncaring by nature and so saw no hope for change.”
I venture the Timonists do not see the paradigm shift, they believe the people are stupid. The cynics of the left, however, do believe the People intelligent enough to become angry. Participative Democracy in Cynical with hope for change the Competing elites model is Timonist which believes that things are as they are. Graeber is very good on this dichotomy with Parmenides and Heraclitus (https://web.archive.org/web/20051013071527/http://www.commoner.org.uk/10graeber.pdf P.19
They belong, one might say, to the Heraclitean tradition, which in Western thought has always been somewhat marginal. Western philosophy, after all, really begins with the quarrel between Heraclitus and Parmenides; a quarrel that Parmenides won ), Brush up your Diogenes of Sinope he is one of my favourites. (got the tee shirt)
Now put your Lamp away finding an honest media outlet likely to give any kind of Left, its blessing, remember the engraving “Cynics saw what people could be and were angered by what they had become; Timonists felt humans were hopelessly stupid & uncaring by nature and so saw no hope for change.”
I apologise for this being rather long, The Alex Thomson serves as a very good introduction to the Two opposing Schools of Greek Philosophy but of course, there are Pre Socratic Traditions and all the other Eastern, and Pagan Traditions which complicate the Emergent reality of Our modern world. Heuristics is a study of the emergence and the big lies of modern science revolve around taking fixed points in models ignoring the essential heuristics embedded in any material object. Thank you for your indulgence. Rog
British fair play used to be a standard all Britons felt they could be measured by. Letting someone speak for themselves, a right to reply and the presumption of innocence all, defined the British sense of fair play, more so than the Stiff Upper Lip or, any other cultural stereotype. The most universal cultural ideal up for “Cultural appropriation” would arguably be the British Sense of Fairplay, followed by irony and self-effacement.
So what are we to make of the “Corbin” turn in our discourse about The leader of her majesties loyal opposition.
Following headlines screaming Corbyn car crash interview on Andrew Neal and other breathless condemnations in line with the Corbin Headlined litany of betrayals and Calumnies of this rather self-effacing Geography teacheresque pin-up.
Paxman took the laurels in 2017 for me describing Theresa May as a Colouring in Graduate and Corbyn as a moth-eaten Geography teacher, its an image once imagined, that is hard to remove.
https://www.ft.com/content/b1882fb2-46b9-11e7-8d27-59b4dd6296b8?mhq5j=e6I interviewed both Mrs May and Mr Corbyn this week. In manner they resembled a nervous geography student and an ageing geography teacher. The odd thing is that Mrs May is a former student of geography (or “colouring in”, as it was known to other Oxford students). She now dresses in the style of a Maidenhead matron on her way to a Tory wine-and-cheese evening. She looks nervy on television. Mr Corbyn’s academic career ended when he dropped out of a course in trade union studies at North London Poly. He retains the style of his lecturers and goes into avuncular mode when questioned.
Paxman’s sharp tongue has lashed the Bullingdon Smoothe talking Brino Bar Steward rather a lot.
See.
In 2017 I made this adaption of the Michael Moore trump eulogy, ( Intended as Ironic but which I think won Trump the Presidency), in his Moore in Trump land show. The Establishment is still trying to restore the process back to the Show Pony Karaoke politics, pre-Corbyn, Trump, Brexit and Russian Cyber interference and Fake News you can belive in turn which they so clearly miscalculated and still continue to misunderstand.
There is an Old Peter sellers Film, Being There, In it Sellers plays Chauncey Gardner, a simple fellow who is found in the House of a recently passed away Rich employer, he is the Gardner at the property and by a series of coincidences Gardner ends up as the advisor to the President of the USA.
Jeremy Corbyn is a Keen Gardner and he too is perhaps part of a larger plan being hatched by the Global establishment. Are we to believe that Jeremy Corbyn is the Human equivalent of 9/11 defeating the most controlled and narrative-driven period of political manipulations for the past 100 years?
Two recent open goals have been presented to Mr Corbyns Labour Party, The Waspi’s and now the unredacted NHS negotiations wrapped up in the US Trade deal negotiations. The Establishment wants Mr Corbyns Labour to do well but not that well, after all, they have some re warmed Brino to serve up to the unsuspecting British electorate and Mr Johnson, BoJo the clown, is the Specially selected Bar Steward anointed with the task of forcing that tipple down the electorates Throat. Meanwhile to keep things plausibly close but not too close, Mr Farage will be enlightening the British Public Just enough on the Aspects of EU Military Union that it is planned will again keep the House of Commons as such composition that it will remain biddable to the establishments designs but not Honest in the sense of what is in the best interests of the British Public. Of course, the Establishments wish to saddle us with one of its Brightest and best In the One trick pony show of the NWO reality-based community chest, say a David Milliband, a Jeremy Hunt or a Chucka Ummana, all Rhodes Sholarshiped and Erasmus awarded up or all Allbright and beautiful like a Bill Clinton, an early model or a Jimmy Carter? Tony Blair/Cameron/Maywitch project, anyone? They have succeeded with this in Canada with Trudeau and France with Macron, what is it with french Speaking electorates and Election Rigging. It remains to be seen how the Establishment will seek to put one of their Show Ponies back into the Whitehouse, tune in for next years special instalment.
Pre Match Build-Up.
Jeremy Corbyn even Stepford Corbyn is something of a George Best of Political Campaigning, and of course Best Nemesis Chopper Harris, in our metaphor for playing the man and not the ball, Stands in for the Presstitute hoards of stay in your lane stenography “Journalism”,
The Narrative is what one needs to discern reading this game is all about watching who is running off the ball, where are the spaces into which the attacks might flow and where are the man on man markers going and who has Jezzer by the Balls in a Vinnie jones like grip.
The Kick-Off, and First Half.
Posted at 8:28 21 Nov8:28 21 Nov
A man – and his plan
The other parties are offering some of the same message – use the ability of the government to borrow cheaply to invest hundreds of billions in a green future, although Labour has pushed this more than twice as far as the rest.
It is a decisive shift of Britain to a big state, taxing big business more – like continental Europe.
It raises reasonable questions about whether we can afford this.
Labour’s answer? We can’t afford not to and only a very active government can reshape the economy to change the fate of the country, in particular, to meet what it calls a c
Hat Tip To Dek Childs.Footie Analogies beloved of the Aston Villa supporting Show pony, David Cameron.
A Freind Made this Analogy I think it is a good won of Why Corbyn Will be rightfully pleased.
Politics, it’s a funny old game.
Here’s a different take on what’s going on at the moment.
Football is our national game and lots of people are passionate about it. So I’ll use those terms I’ve seen a lot of people who are confused about people being up on a Labour loss.
Labour has not had a good showing in elections for years, so this election where it was very close,(3%, closer than Brexit) is akin to a 3rd division side getting promotion and getting to the cup final and putting a scare into say Chelsea or Man Utd. Not a win but a fantastic result.Everyone cheering on the team and the manager. what a great job.
On the other hand, the Conservatives did very badly. Imagine being top of the league, in the cup, looking to have a strong showing in Europe and then mid-season, the manager changes tactics, the team has a string of defeats, out of the cup, out of Europe and in danger of relegation, now reliant on other teams to stay up. If that was your team, as supporters, you would be furious, rightfully so and calling for the manager’s sacking and immediate replacement.
So, that being said, where are all the furious Tory voters baying for the sacking of the PM?
49:15
think the person I most in the world at
49:18
the present time is the general
49:19
secretary Guterres, he is
49:21
trying to bring the world together okay
Stepford Corbyn.
They say you can tell a lot about a man by the company he keeps and those they admire,
By the Sun’s “Corbin” Standard, this would not be a promising start, but if we think about Bernie Saunders, a similarly abused stalking horse from the 2016 Democratic primaries in the states. This comes to mind.
During the debate, Sanders declared, “I am dangerous for Wall Street,” to thunderous applause. A high-point in a debate that Sanders easily carried.
Watch.
TwitterGov
✔@TwitterGov
·
El momento que ha generado más Tweets de #DemDebate:
TwitterGov
✔@TwitterGov
Top Tweeted moment for #DemDebate: Sanders: “I am dangerous for Wall Street”; Twitter reacts to Benghazi question
So let’s look at Guterres and his political sparring partner, a curious double act and some curious themes emerge.
Guterres was elected President of Socialist International in November 1999,[22] thus overlapping with his second term as Prime Minister of Portugal until his resignation from the latter post in December 2001. He remained President of the Socialist International until June 2005.[22]
Guterres and Prime Minister of Spain Felipe González, in January 1996.
With a style markedly different from that of his predecessor, and based on dialogue and discussion with all sections of society, Guterres was a popular prime minister in the first years of his office. Portugal was enjoying a solid economic expansion which allowed the Socialists to reduce budget deficits while increasing welfare spending and creating new conditional cash transfer programs.[15] His government also accelerated the program of privatizations which had been undertaken by Cavaco Silva’s government: a total of 29 companies were privatized between 1996 and 1999, with proceeds from privatizations in 1996-7 being greater than those of the previous six years, and the public sector’s share of GDP being halved from 11 percent in 1994 to 5.5 percent five years later. Share ownership was also widened, with 800,000 people investing in Portugal Telecom upon its privatization in 1996 and 750,000 applying for shares in Electricidade de Portugal.[9]
In 1998, Guterres presided over Expo 98 in Lisbon, commemorating the 500th anniversary of the voyage of Vasco da Gama.[16] Also in 1998, two nationwide referenda were held. The first one was held in June, and asked the voters whether abortion rules should be liberalized. The Socialist Party split over the issue of liberalization, and Guterres himself led the pro-life side, which eventually won the referendum.[15] A second referendum was held in November, this time over the regionalization of the mainland. In this referendum, both Guterres and his party supported the approval of such an administrative reform. In this second referendum, Guterres suffered a political defeat, as the proposal was rejected by the voters.
Contrary to his party stance and following the removal of homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses by the World Health Organization in 1990, Guterres said, in 1995, that “he did not like homosexuality” and that he considered it “something that bothered him”.[17]
António Guterres in 2003
On foreign policy, Guterres campaigned for United Nations intervention in East Timor in 1999, after the former Portuguese colony was virtually destroyed by Indonesian-backed militias when it voted for independence.[8] He also finalized the 12-year-long negotiations on the transfer of sovereignty over Macau, which had been a Portuguese colony, to Chinese control in 1999.[18]
In the 1999 parliamentary election the Socialist Party and the opposition won exactly the same number of MPs (115). Guterres was re-appointed for the office and from January to July 2000, occupied the six-month rotating presidency of the European Council. This second term in government was not as successful, however. Internal party conflicts along with a slowdown in economic growth and the Hintze Ribeiro Bridge disaster damaged his authority and popularity. Nevertheless, some long-lasting measures were taken during his second term: in October 2000, the Parliament approved the decriminalization of drug use (effective from 1 July 2001)[19] and in March 2001, same-sex civil unions were legalized.[18][20]
The Casa Pia child sexual abuse scandal was a case of child sexual abuses involving a number of children and employees at Casa Pia, a Portuguese state-run institution for the education and support of poor children and under-age orphans.[1] Portuguese Judiciary Police (Polícia Judiciária) officials estimate that more than 100 boys and girls[1] of the 4,600 pupils enrolled in Casa Pia at the time, including some deaf and mute, may have been sexually abused throughout several decades. The scandal involved several prominent men, including TV presenter Carlos Cruz, former Casa Pia governor Manuel Abrantes, and former UNESCO ambassador Jorge Ritto.[2] The trial is one of the longest running in Portuguese history, lasting more than five years, with testimony from more than 800 witnesses and experts.[3]
On 3 September 2010, Carlos Cruz, Carlos Silvino, Hugo Marçal, Manuel Abrantes, Ferreira Diniz and Jorge Ritto were convicted and sentenced to up to eighteen years in prison due to crimes occurring in the late 1990s and early 2000s. This was the first time an institutional sex abuse scandal had been taken to court in Portugal.
Portuguese Judiciary Police (Polícia Judiciária) first accused the caretaker of a Casa Pia state-run children’s home in 1981 of raping dozens of children over a period of 30 years, even though some reports of abuse pre-date the 1974 Carnation Revolution. Police accused the perpetrators of supplying children to men from Portugal and other countries, including to some prominent public figures in Portugal.[1] However, these early allegations did not result in any legal action.
The Prime Minister at the time, José Manuel Durão Barroso, whose Social Democratic Party ousted the Socialists in March 2002, promised to bring life and honor back into the Casa Pia children’s homes and allow new director Catalina Pestana to reform the institution. As a result, several senior staff of Casa Pia were fired after the 2002 revelations. However, Pestana told parliament and the media, as late as 2007, that there may still be paedophiles in the Casa Pia system. She also criticised the legal changes made after the start of the trial, which she claims were made in order to help those who were present to court.[6] These controversial legal changes were partially reverted just before the sentence in September 2010.[7]
The Casa Pia abuse scandal has had the effect of raising public awareness of sexual abuse of children. The number of incidents reported to Portuguese police has soared after the scandal has been revealed.[8]
The Casa Pia child sex abuse trial started in 2004. In 2004, as an arguido involved in the trial, Carlos Cruz published a book of personal reflections, Preso 374.[9] The final allegations, formerly scheduled for 20 October 2008 in Lisbon were postponed several times. The country’s justice system, often accused of being excruciatingly slow, is believed by some opinion makers such as journalists and Catalina Pestana (former head of Casa Pia), to be vulnerable to external pressures of well-connected personalities and the possibility of corrupting external interference has been considered a real danger, according to those critics.[6] They feared that even if Carlos Silvino (the Casa Pia driver), whose initial trial had been twice postponed, is found guilty, better-connected abusers might go free.[10]
On 3 September 2010, Carlos Cruz (seven years), Carlos Silvino (eighteen years), Hugo Marçal (six years, two months), Manuel Abrantes (five years, nine months), Ferreira Diniz (seven years) and Jorge Ritto (six years, eight months) were convicted on charges of paedophilia and other crimes occurring in the late 1990s and early 2000s.[11] The full ruling, which allegedly runs to nearly 2,000 pages, was due to be released on 8 September 2010.[2] However, it was delayed several times due to a Microsoft Word glitch.[12][13] On 13 September 2010 the full ruling containing the verdict was released. According to chief prosecutor Miguel Matias, the victims were pleased with the outcome.[2] The court ruling was hailed as a victory by those fighting for Casa Pia children’s rights in Portugal, such as Pedro Namora, a former pupil at Casa Pia and now a lawyer who publicly supported the victims, and Catalina Pestana, who was head of Casa Pia during the period when some of the cases were made public in the early 2000s.[14]
Two Factions of Globalisation. Barosso and Guterres
Two Factions of UN eugenicist Internationalism. Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn
or are they?
Cummings Bat-Signal.
The Spin doctors of Globalism and Internationalism?
June 14, 2019
GOING GLOBUL, POLITICAL AND TECH IGNORAMUSES. BAD BOYS OF BREXIT AND THE IDIOCY OF MOLLY SCOTT CATO AND THE PC ACADEMIC LEFT. HEAT IS WORK AND WORK’S A CURSE M: AND ALL THE HEAT IN THE UNIVERSE M: IS GONNA COOL DOWN, M: ‘COS IT CAN’T INCREASE M: THEN THERE’LL BE NO MORE WORK M: AND THERE’LL BE PERFECT PEACE D: REALLY? M: YEAH, THAT’S ENTROPY, MAN. #CONQUESTOFDOUGH #BRINONONON
This something of a Notebook Post, for now, The sheer amount of Data and analysis on the Dominic Cummings Blog is a Treasure trove and one really wonders where to start.
Richard North.
Who do you think you are kidding Dr North If you think we’re on the Run. #Technocracy #OligarchicalCollectivism
Q172 Chair: Okay. Is there anything you want to add, Mr North? Before you get going, I know that you were due to come before another Committee earlier this year that, for reasons I will not go into, at the very last minute told you were not required. You then said: “[The Committee] has no credibility outside its own circle and is just another symptom of the decay of Parliament as a meaningful institution.”
Therefore, once we leave we will once again return to the point where we speak for ourselves and are able to vote for ourselves. That is a clear advantage.
GrubStreetJournal@GrubStreetJorno
Brexiter Richard North: WTO “a complete non-starter.” https://youtu.be/ImZHIX5ljgg via @YouTube
Is North Nato controlled opposition? Oceana (NATO) Eurasia (EU MILITARY) The Bankers Man , (how to invade Poland without Tanks)?
The Headline of this article is, Would the real Jeremy Corbyn please stand up.
I think Mr Corbyn has actually done that, his position against BRINO is quite clear and that he is a Natural Foe of EU Federal Globalism seems beyond any reasonable doubt.
But what choice is Mr Corbyn really offering, I would argue it is the Guterres UN Agenda 2030/2021 choice, which is a Brand of Globalist/Internationalism which I consider to be Stalinist. From an Establishment perspective I think this makes Mr Corbyn a STalking Horse candidate and Curiously I think that is what Mr Johnson is too although in his case it is for a Corporate State Monopoly Capitalist version of Globalism where again Johnson serves as a Stalking horse, halfway house to the sort of Corporate Feudalism and Mercantilist Laissaez fairre Trotskyist ( Post Fordist world View)
Since this discovery, the Sussex VC has been critiqued for his hypocrisy through tweets, signs at picket lines and protests, and on social media posts.
Gavin Grindon@GavinGrindon
Some interesting bus stop ads appeared on the streets outside UUK HQ and around several London universities today. #ucustrike
So this Election I am dubbing the Stalking horse Election and other similar types of the election have been the Evil of Two Lessers jamborees we have seen I the States since 92 when Ross Perot was sidelined to keep the NWO Pony Show Alive and Kicking.
The Show Ponies are The David Milliband’s, Marco Rubios, and Jeremy Hunts, The Trudeaus and the Macrons the “Brightest and Best” cross-dressing Girly Swots, The Camerons The Cleggs and the Chucka Ummanas.
So its a choice of two Gate Keepers, The B Teams, the stand-ins, the stooges and the not quite there, no there there, but more there than the show ponies and too much there to be completely controlled. The Level of Kompromat on Johnson and Corbyn is clearly not sufficient to keep the Tail wagging the dog with the Two front Runners.
On Gatekeepers and so Forth I highly recommend this on Line E-Book.
As I said already, I really enjoy the Corbett Report.
HOW THE US USES WAR TO PROTECT THE DOLLAR
Following the support claimed by Extinction Rebellion from Noam Chomsky and David Graeber one re-considered ones own position on a cherished Hero, and in the words of Keynes, when the facts change I change my opinion.
” weeks ago I wrote this comment .
Having Previously Written this a year ago.
This appaling Talk
To a friend who was on the production team of this Garbage
“why was this moron put on for over an hour it takes only two minutes to demonstrate he is a moron.” reply from friend
HahahahahahaI was in the room when they filmed this But fell out with them
Me Again.
08:47The talk is absolute rubbish Ranjan, is the guy ok in real life I think Extinction Rebellion is a fraudulent decoy for sincere concerned people, a state-created dead end if you will. Looking at some of its prominent supporters the Gatekeeping team is emerging with some surprising people, many are useful idiots but there are some surprises like Chomsky and Graeber, it seems that whatever the crisis is that is looming all assets are being employed regardless of keeping their credibility.
The final Tell as poker players will tell you there is always something that gives the Bluff away.
With Both Corbyn and Johnson its the CO2 nonsense the Climate Emergency and the Net-zero BS.
Many moons ago I visited the offices of an Irish Property developer just setting up in London Docklands. The Top Spade of this outfit was keen to impress upon me the shortcomings in the overthunk incompetence of me and my fellow Commercial Estate Agents. He påroceeded to explain to me about the Rule of three and how Land for development should be properly appraised.
“Yu see there Mr Lewis , tis verry simple ya know. Now how I explain it is this, It a Turd , a Turd and A Turd. that’s a Turd for your Ground, a Trurd for your buildings and a turd for your other costs and your profit.”
rogerglewis
November 25, 2019 at 10:01 pm
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
So this life of man appears for a short space, but of what went before, or what is to follow, we are utterly ignorant. #GE2019#Analysis Notes for an Essay/Poem. https://t.co/XMA1f1MRxA
The present life of man, O king, seems to me, in comparison of that time which is unknown to us, like to the swift flight of a sparrow through the room wherein you sit at supper in winter, with your commanders and ministers, and a good fire in the midst, whilst the storms of rain and snow prevail abroad; the sparrow, I say, flying in at one door, and immediately out at another, whilst he is within, is safe from the wintry storm; but after a short space of fair weather, he immediately vanishes out of your sight, into the dark winter from which he had emerged. So this life of man appears for a short space, but of what went before, or what is to follow, we are utterly ignorant. If therefore, this new doctrine contains something more certain, it seems justly to deserve to be followed.
“The last thing that Peter and I agreed on was the impeachment of President Clinton. But this is not simply a political-party difference. These things rarely are. In England, for instance, Sir Charles Powell is an eminent figure. He first rose to fame as a foreign-policy adviser to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. His younger brother Jonathan Powell is chief of staff to Prime Minister Tony Blair. But many people do not even know that they are related, because they resolutely decline to pronounce the family name in the same way. Sir Charles prefers to say it so as to rhyme with “pole,” the slightly affected form that was also insisted upon by that supreme novelist of the English elite, Anthony Powell. Young Jonathan, perhaps more the man of the people, chooses to do what most readers of the name would do, rhyme it with “towel.” I know for a fact that one political-summit trip meant that the brotherly duo had to board the same official aircraft. This did not mean, however, that they had to exchange a single word with each other.
The Poleists and Towelists have nothing on the Hitchenses.”
A favourite Novel of mine is the Scheme for Full Employment, it is Dry Kafkaesque absurdism done at it’s best. There are two Factions, The WOWrk to Rulers and Early Swervers, both factions are engaged in an Enterprise of the circular manufacture and dismantling of UNI Vans. Its an Allegory of some sort I would be interested if anyone else has read it. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/325602.The_Scheme_For_Full_Employment
How Interesting to compare, Jo Johnstone and his Brother Boris, Piers Corbyn and His Brother Jeremy, Ed Milliband and his brother David, perhaps some Father-Son lineage might also prove informative, Tony Benn, Hilary Ben, Neil Kinnock Stephen Kinnock, George Bush 1 George Bush the Second.
I noticed this morning that Channel 4 will be screening a leaders debate on “Climate” this coming Thursday, Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage will apparently not be taking part? I think I will tune in and as a bit of fun, I might pre-write the script and publish before the show goes out to see how accurate I am.
Final Word for Peter Hitchins,
“…Edward describes, it suggests that my late brother’s attitude towards the Soviet experiment was more, er, nuanced than he might later have wished to acknowledge. Of course he was not a Stalinist, the charge which he angrily denied, though I had not made it. He was a Trotskyist, first as a member of a Trotskyist grouplet and later as an admirer (as he states clearly here) of Trotsky himself, see https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0076zht
(This, by the way, was recorded in August 2006).
But in my experience, quite a lot of Trotskyists (and he was definitely one of those) still defended aspects of the Soviet experiment, as Trotsky did himself. I was keenly aware of this as, even in my most fervent Trotskyist phase, I could never bring myself to see anything good about the USSR, and once got into trouble with my International Socialist comrades for issuing at the University of York (above the IS imprint) a leaflet saying that the Soviet Union was ‘no more socialist than Surrey’.
There is an Old Peter sellers Film, Being There, In it Sellers plays Chauncey Gardner, a simple fellow who is found in the House of a recently passed away Rich employer, he is the Gardner at the property and by a series of coincidences Gardner ends up as the advisor to the President of the USA.
Rand is also a confidant and advisor to the President of the United States, whom he introduces to “Chauncey.” In a discussion about the economy, Chance takes his cue from the words “stimulate growth” and talks about the changing seasons of the garden. The President misinterprets this as optimistic political advice and quotes “Chauncey Gardiner” in a speech. Chance now rises to national prominence, attends important dinners, develops a close connection with the Soviet ambassador, and appears on a television talk show during which his detailed advice about what a serious gardener should do is misunderstood as his opinion on what would be his presidential policy.
Though he has now risen to the top of Washington society, the Secret Service and some 16 other agencies are unable to find any background information on him. During this time Rand’s physician, Dr. Allenby, becomes increasingly suspicious that Chance is not a wise political expert and that the mystery of his identity may have a more mundane explanation. Dr. Allenby considers telling Rand this, but realizing how happy Chance is making him in his final days keeps him silent.
Jeremy Corbyn is a Keen Gardner and he too is perhaps part of a larger plan being hatched by the Global establishment. Are we to believe that Jeremy Corbyn is the Human equivalent of 9/11 defeating the most controlled and narrative-driven period of political manipulations for the past 100 years?
Two recent open goals have been presented to Mr Corbyns Labour Party, The Waspi’s and now the unredacted NHS negotiations wrapped up in the US Trade deal negotiations. The Establishment wants Mr Corbyns Labour to do well but not that well, after all, they have some re warmed Brino to serve up to the unsuspecting British electorate and Mr Johnson, BoJo the clown, is the Specially selected Bar Steward anointed with the task of forcing that tipple down the electorates Throat. Meanwhile to keep things plausibly close but not too close, Mr Farage will be enlightening the British Public Just enough on the Aspects of EU Military Union that it is planned will again keep the House of Commons as such composition that it will remain biddable to the establishments designs but not Honest in the sense of what is in the best interests of the British Public. Of course, the Establishments wish to saddle us with one of its Brightest and best In the One trick pony show of the NWO reality-based community chest, say a David Milliband, a Jeremy Hunt or a Chucka Ummana, all Rhodes Sholarshiped and Erasmus awarded up or all Allbright and beautiful like a Bill Clinton, an early model or a Jimmy Carter? Tony Blair/Cameron/Maywitch project, anyone? They have succeeded with this in Canada with Trudeau and France with Macron, what is it with french Speaking electorates and Election Rigging. It remains to be seen how the Establishment will seek to put one of their Show Ponies back into the Whitehouse, tune in for next years special instalment.
• The query about 'health insurance' was likely a fishing expedition to check the tone of our
response. We do not currently believe the US has a major offensive interest in this space –
not through the SOE chapter at least. Our response dealt with this for now, but we will need
to be able to go into more detail about the functioning of the NHS and our views on whether
or not it is engaged in commercial activities, including through consultation with the Public
Services team in TPD.
53
Administration may want a shift in some areas of policy here so they were unable to answer some of
the questions we posed. It was nevertheless a very helpful exposition on the key areas we can expect
the US to push in an FTA and for us to start to determine the areas where we may find ourselves in
difficult territory. The impact of some patent issues raised on NHS access to generic drugs (i.e. cheaper
drugs) will be a key consideration going forward.
SB (UK) explained that the consultations with the public on trade with the US, New Zealand,
Australia and potentially exploring CPTPP formally launched on July 20 and closed Oct 26.
Privately the UK has received 160,000 responses from US consultation. Less were bespoke
individual responses and many more were from campaigns which has themes that were expected
based on TTIP: NHS protection, high food standards, and ISDS challenging sovereignty. The UK
government will not response to every comment, but instead will publishing a government
response to concerns and opportunities including how the government will consider them in future
trade talks.
SB (UK) explained that the consultations with the public on trade with the US, New Zealand,
Australia and potentially exploring CPTPP formally launched on July 20 and closed Oct 26.
Privately the UK has received 160,000 responses from US consultation. Less were bespoke
individual responses and many more were from campaigns which has themes that were expected
based on TTIP: NHS protection, high food standards, and ISDS challenging sovereignty. The UK
government will not response to every comment, but instead will publishing a government
HEALTH
15. DCMS highlighted that broadly, the US and the UK clearly have a lot of common interests in this area,
and that this will be a fruitful area of future discussion. The US said that the most problematic area
within the data localization issue is health information and the HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act, 1996), which dictates that cross-border data flows are allowed as long as certain
harmonisation during EU Exit.
The US view the introduction of warning labels as harmful rather than as a step to public health.
16. The UK (Surrey) asked how public health, and broader issues like sugar content, fat, anti-microbial
resistance fit into the regulatory system. Callahan acknowledged that these are important global issues.
Whilst they follow the guidance set by WHO, they are concerned that labelling food with high sugar
content (as has been done with tobacco) is not particularly useful in changing consumer behaviour.
2. The US (Peterson) responded that there is data protection for big and small molecules. The US started
with small molecule protection which is set as five years. The passage of the American Health Care Act
11. The UK (Whitehead) stated the EU is looking at the balance achieved by the existing SPC regime in the
EU. The UK asked whether the US had done any research on the balance between health systems and
rights holders?
12. The US (Peterson) stated that it believes there was some done in TPP and the US can look into this for
the UK.
burdens. However, Health and Safety and Environmental areas cannot be exempt. Different sectors
2. KT highlighted ‘significant’ private sector interest on both sides of the Atlantic in the Blue
Economy [which – as part of the ‘clusters’ model – involves development of dynamic regional,
national and international linkages between commercial, research and public-sector
stakeholders to promote sustainable use of ocean resources for economic growth, improved
livelihoods and jobs, and ocean ecosystem health]. While KT explained that the US does not
4. KT set out that cooperation would take place within the framework of the Galway Trilateral
Context (i.e. in the context of the Galway Statement (2013) between the EU, Canada and the
United States of America). Primary concerns under this agenda at present include:
o The sustainable use of ocean resources in the North Atlantic, and understanding of
current and future stressors on ocean health (e.g. business, tourism, etc.);
2. PK noted that smart fabrics are for an emerging priority for the US, and this is driving a lot of
cluster work in certain areas (i.e. health, and general apparel). There is also a great deal of
interest in drone-technology, with a lot of University-level activity and an inter-regional
competition focussed on different aspects of drone use and different forms of drone-technology
application (e.g. agriculture; how drones interact with local airspace). There may be good
opportunities for collaborating on drone technology, although it is less certain where we might
collaborate on the robotics side given this is not a Silicon Valley cluster focus.
4. KT sounded a cautionary note, underscoring public sensitivities over the perceived risks to
livelihoods posed by these technologies. We may want to look at profiling transformative sectors
that are perceived as having a less ambiguous socio-economic impact, such as e-health (where
a lot of work is being done). While we accepted this risk, CS noted that there is operationally no
reason that we should not invite the robotics cluster to participate at the April 2019 event; we can
then decide on appropriate framing and messaging to ensure that this does not generate
concerns over job-losses.
Emily Bleimund (EB – VC) Health and Human Services (HHS)
The US (Callahan) outlined that during the recent June VTC, discussion was focussed on APHIS.
The US stressed the need for a technical discussion to talk through specifics on animal health as
there are no problems on the plant health side.
Key Actions and Next Steps:
VEA
• The need for a regulator-to-regulator discussion on issues on the animal health side.
• The UK will share a short form text, mindful of the US position.
• The UK will let the US know why our regulators need specific parts of the VEA as on the US side
trade would continue without it – the UK needs to establish why it would not from a UK regulatory
perspective.
• The US expressed a willingness to transition the agreement if we have a commitment to
renegotiate in April 2019.
Daisy Ellis (DE) Medicines and Healthcare Products
Rachel Mumford (RM) Department for Health (DH)
Donald Beers (DB – VC) Health and Human Services (HHS)
Key Points to Note:
1. This session provided the UK with an opportunity to provide a comprehensive overview of our
approach to patent policy and highlight how this is intricately linked to the UK health system. The
UK provided a broad overview of how the UK patent system contributes to an innovative pharma
sector and facilitates a balance between generics, innovators and the public whilst stressing the
importance of this system for the health sector. A strategic approach combining five
119
Report of Discussions and Outcome:
Introductions
1. MP (UK) introduced the day’s session, split into 5 UK mini-presentations and 1 US overview of
their non-paper. The session with focus on patents with respect to pharmaceuticals and health,
topics covered will be:
o Overview of UK innovation and how the patent system works with respect to
pharmaceuticals/health system
o A UK patent system case study
o USTR to present their non-paper
o Data/market exclusivity rules in the UK
o Supplementary Patent Certificates
o An overview of the UK Patent Courts
120
3. AT (UK) presented the UK pharmaceutical sector and outlined why the UK patent regime was
central to this industry. The pharmaceutical sector has an annual turnover of £48.2 billion, it
employs over 100,000 people from 2,000 businesses, and it is closely integrated with the UK’s
national health system. The UK sector has strong links with the international pharmaceutical
sector. The strength of the UK science industry is critical to the strength of the pharma sector.
These companies are looking to protect their investment in R&D and therefore have a great
interest in the UK patent system. The UK government is one of highest spenders on the
innovative pharmaceuticals industry, second only to the US on government expenditure in this
area. When looking at the life sciences strategy in the wider industrial strategy, R&D is vital,
therefore the patent system is key for maintaining and enhancing UK R&D and its foothold in the
larger global R&D industry.
5. A fundamental principle that runs through the UK IP system is the balance of providing exclusive
rights to encourage investment and innovation, whilst recognising there is a health need for these
innovative products and therefore a need to ensure that they are appropriately available. The UK
takes a balanced approach to our IP regime, considering the interests of generics, public and
innovators.
80. Publication of marketing approval - Marketing authorities are not involved in the process to
determine what (if any) infringement is occurring when a generic applies for authorisation. The
market authorisation process is purely scientific, concerning the clinical, safety and health
implications of the product. Therefore, a generic can get market authorisation even if litigation
has commenced. MHRA publishes all products that have received marketing approval monthly.
Innovators can see any generics who have gained marketing approval and take legal action if
required.
• We have reached a point (for Patents in Pharmaceuticals/Health) where beyond specific policy
details in niche areas, we are awaiting the clearance to negotiate and exchange text to really
take significant further steps. There is however significant scope to discuss patents in other areas
at future sessions, in particular: Technology and Agriculture/Chemicals.
32. Nursing was the other profession that the US was interested in. Nursing in the US was very closely co-
ordinated with Canada and Ireland. The relationship with Canada was particularly close and Canada had
adopted the US exam. A compact between 25-30 states meant that nurses were able to move between
those states. The US were interested to know if it would be really problematic for the UK to act in this
area – they were sensitive to the particular sensitivities with the health sector in the UK.
Anne Snyder US Department of Health and Human Services
• USTR probed UK position on our 'health insurance' system
8. USTR asked about the UK portfolio of SOEs (understood that it was small) and if the
UK had concerns about their “health insurance system”
DIT: Wouldn’t want to go down avenue of talking about specific entities but the UK has an
advanced competition law regime and strong corporate governance rules, and we believe
we are compliant with international best practice. Wouldn’t want to discuss particular health
care entities at this time, you’ll be aware of certain statements saying we need to protect
our needs; this would be something to discuss further down the line when we come to
consider what entities would count as 'enterprises'.
• The query about 'health insurance' was likely a fishing expedition to check the tone of our
response. We do not currently believe the US has a major offensive interest in this space –
not through the SOE chapter at least. Our response dealt with this for now, but we will need
to be able to go into more detail about the functioning of the NHS and our views on whether
or not it is engaged in commercial activities, including through consultation with the Public
15. DCMS highlighted that broadly, the US and the UK clearly have a lot of common interests in this area,
and that this will be a fruitful area of future discussion. The US said that the most problematic area
within the data localization issue is health information and the HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act, 1996)
harmonisation during EU Exit.
The US view the introduction of warning labels as harmful rather than as a step to public health.
16. The UK (Surrey) asked how public health, and broader issues like sugar content, fat, anti-microbial
resistance fit into the regulatory system. Callahan acknowledged that these are important global issues.
Whilst they follow the guidance set by WHO, they are concerned that labelling food with high sugar
content (as has been done with tobacco) is not particularly useful in changing consumer behaviour.
A heavy black volume, amateurishly bound, with no name or title on the cover. The print also looked slightly irregular. The pages were worn at the edges, and fell apart easily, as though the book had passed through many hands. The inscription on the title-page ran:[1]THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF OLIGARCHICAL COLLECTIVISM
by Emmanuel Goldstein
”
The term “oligarchical collectivism” refers not only to the ideology of the Party Ingsoc (English Socialism) but also to the ideologies of the other two states (Neo-Bolshevism in Eurasia; in Eastasia, “Death Worship” or “Obliteration of the Self”). Winston reads two long excerpts establishing[2] how the three totalitarian super-states – Oceania, Eastasia, and Eurasia – emerged from a global war, thus connecting the past and the present, and explains the basic political philosophy of the totalitarianism that derived from the authoritarian political tendencies manifested in the twentieth century. That the three “opposing” ideologies are functionally identical is central to the revelations of The Book.
rogerglewis
November 25, 2019 at 10:01 pm
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
So this life of man appears for a short space, but of what went before, or what is to follow, we are utterly ignorant. #GE2019#Analysis Notes for an Essay/Poem. https://t.co/XMA1f1MRxA
The present life of man, O king, seems to me, in comparison of that time which is unknown to us, like to the swift flight of a sparrow through the room wherein you sit at supper in winter, with your commanders and ministers, and a good fire in the midst, whilst the storms of rain and snow prevail abroad; the sparrow, I say, flying in at one door, and immediately out at another, whilst he is within, is safe from the wintry storm; but after a short space of fair weather, he immediately vanishes out of your sight, into the dark winter from which he had emerged. So this life of man appears for a short space, but of what went before, or what is to follow, we are utterly ignorant. If therefore, this new doctrine contains something more certain, it seems justly to deserve to be followed.
“The last thing that Peter and I agreed on was the impeachment of President Clinton. But this is not simply a political-party difference. These things rarely are. In England, for instance, Sir Charles Powell is an eminent figure. He first rose to fame as a foreign-policy adviser to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. His younger brother Jonathan Powell is chief of staff to Prime Minister Tony Blair. But many people do not even know that they are related, because they resolutely decline to pronounce the family name in the same way. Sir Charles prefers to say it so as to rhyme with “pole,” the slightly affected form that was also insisted upon by that supreme novelist of the English elite, Anthony Powell. Young Jonathan, perhaps more the man of the people, chooses to do what most readers of the name would do, rhyme it with “towel.” I know for a fact that one political-summit trip meant that the brotherly duo had to board the same official aircraft. This did not mean, however, that they had to exchange a single word with each other.
The Poleists and Towelists have nothing on the Hitchenses.”
A favourite Novel of mine is the Scheme for Full Employment, it is Dry Kafkaesque absurdism done at it’s best. There are two Factions, The WOWrk to Rulers and Early Swervers, both factions are engaged in an Enterprise of the circular manufacture and dismantling of UNI Vans. Its an Allegory of some sort I would be interested if anyone else has read it. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/325602.The_Scheme_For_Full_Employment
How Interesting to compare, Jo Johnstone and his Brother Boris, Piers Corbyn and His Brother Jeremy, Ed Milliband and his brother David, perhaps some Father-Son lineage might also prove informative, Tony Benn, Hilary Ben, Neil Kinnock Stephen Kinnock, George Bush 1 George Bush the Second.
I noticed this morning that Channel 4 will be screening a leaders debate on “Climate” this coming Thursday, Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage will apparently not be taking part? I think I will tune in and as a bit of fun, I might pre-write the script and publish before the show goes out to see how accurate I am.
Final Word for Peter Hitchins,
“…Edward describes, it suggests that my late brother’s attitude towards the Soviet experiment was more, er, nuanced than he might later have wished to acknowledge. Of course he was not a Stalinist, the charge which he angrily denied, though I had not made it. He was a Trotskyist, first as a member of a Trotskyist grouplet and later as an admirer (as he states clearly here) of Trotsky himself, see https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0076zht
(This, by the way, was recorded in August 2006).
But in my experience, quite a lot of Trotskyists (and he was definitely one of those) still defended aspects of the Soviet experiment, as Trotsky did himself. I was keenly aware of this as, even in my most fervent Trotskyist phase, I could never bring myself to see anything good about the USSR, and once got into trouble with my International Socialist comrades for issuing at the University of York (above the IS imprint) a leaflet saying that the Soviet Union was ‘no more socialist than Surrey’.
them niggers, Jews and Sigma Nus All they ever do is breed And wops ‘n micks ‘n slopes ‘n spics ‘n spooks Are on my list And there’s one little heeb from the heart of Texas Is there anyone I missed?”
“Rhinos Twats Cunts and Trots and Ruskies and the reds But St Theresa yall should know is an effin Stay- lin- ist.”
On 3rd November last year I published the post I reproduce below. It is, as far as I know, the most thorough and careful analysis of what we actually know about the last alleged use of poison gas by the Syrian state, in Khan Sheikhoun . I shall have more to say about the more recent accusations later, but – given that all reports of these allegations assume that the Khan Sheikhoun episode is proven beyond reasonable doubt, I thought it important to point out that this is not in fact so.
Please read with care: Link follows one in Article on DailyMail does not work for me here in Sweden.
The term “English Civil War” appears most often in the singular, although historians often divide the conflict into two or three separate wars. These were not restricted to England, as Wales was part of the Kingdom of England and affected accordingly. The conflicts also involved wars with Scotland and Ireland, and civil wars within them.
Unlike other civil wars in England, which focused on who should rule, these conflicts were more concerned with the manner in which the three kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland were governed. The 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica called the series of conflicts the “Great Rebellion”,[4] while some historians – notably Marxists such as Christopher Hill (1912–2003) – long favoured the term “English Revolution“.[5]
Girondins (named after the Girondedepartment, where many of its prominent members came from; initially they were also called Brissotins after their leader Jacques Pierre Brissot): faction of liberalrepublicans who were primarily supported by the wealthy bourgeoisie from Southern and Western France. They consisted of the right-wing of the Jacobins and were staunch defenders of the rights of man and popular sovereignty against a centralised state governed from Paris. The Girondins desired to export the Revolution to the rest of Europe and therefore urged on war with Austria and Prussia (20 April 1792). They played a central role in the fall of the monarchy (21 September 1792) and the execution of the deposed king, Louis XVI (21 January 1793). Faced by the rise of The Mountain, the Girondins showed increasingly royalist tendencies in the spring of 1793. They were overthrown by the Montagnard insurrection of 31 May – 2 June 1793 and their leaders were guillotined.[7]
The Plain (La Plaine), also pejoratively known as The Marsh (Le Marais) or Maraisards (Marsh-dwellers), was a container term for a large group of parliamentarians who held middle-ground views and inside the National Convention were seated on the lowest benches. Ideologically, they were most closely affiliated with the Girondins, but they barely dared to speak out against the radical Montagnards.[5]
The Mountain (La Montagne, also called the Montagnards, literally Mountain-dwellers, because they were seated on the highest benches in Parliament): grouping of radical and leftist politicians in the Legislative Assembly and National Convention (1792–1795).[8] Their members came from the clubs of the Cordeliers and the left-wing of the Jacobins[5] and sought to establish a radical-democraticrepublic centrally governed from Paris. From June 1793 until July 1794, the Montagnards dominated French politics and the Reign of Terror was conducted under the leadership of Robespierre.[9] Notably after their takeover in June 1793, The Mountain can be thought of as consisting of three rival factions that vied for control, namely the Hébertists (radical leftist Cordeliers), the Dantonists (moderate and more right-wing Cordeliers) and in between them
The population of the Thirteen States was not homogeneous in political views and attitudes. Loyalties and allegiances varied widely within regions and communities and even within families, and sometimes shifted during the course of the Revolution.
The American Enlightenment was a critical precursor of the American Revolution. Chief among the ideas of the American Enlightenment were the concepts of Natural Law, Natural Rights, Consent of the Governed, Individualism, Property Rights, Self-Ownership, Self-Determination, liberalism, republicanism, and defense against corruption. A growing number of American colonists embraced these views and fostered an intellectual environment which led to a new sense of political and social identity.[104]
The causes of secession were complex and have been controversial since the war began, but most academic scholars identify slavery as a central cause of the war. James C. Bradford wrote that the issue has been further complicated by historical revisionists, who have tried to offer a variety of reasons for the war.[23] Slavery was the central source of escalating political tension in the 1850s. The Republican Party was determined to prevent any spread of slavery, and many Southern leaders had threatened secession if the Republican candidate, Lincoln, won the 1860 election. After Lincoln won, many Southern leaders felt that disunion was their only option, fearing that the loss of representation would hamper their ability to promote pro-slavery acts and policies.[24][25]
It began during the Great War, with the February Revolution that was focused in and around Petrograd (now Saint Petersburg), the capital of Russia at that time. The revolution erupted in the context of Russia’s major military losses during the First World War, which resulted in much of the Russian Army being ready to mutiny. In the chaos, members of the Duma, Russia’s parliament, assumed control of the country, forming the Russian Provisional Government. It was dominated by the interests of large capitalists and the noble aristocracy. The army leadership felt they did not have the means to suppress the revolution, and EmperorNicholas II abdicated his throne. Grassroots community assemblies called ‘Soviets‘, which were dominated by soldiers and the urban industrial working class, initially permitted the Provisional Government to rule, but insisted on a prerogative to influence the government and control various militias.
A period of dual power ensued, during which the Provisional Government held state power while the national network of Soviets, led by socialists, had the allegiance of the lower classes and, increasingly, the left-leaning urban middle class. During this chaotic period, there were frequent mutinies, protests and strikes. Many socialist political organizations were engaged in daily struggle and vied for influence within the Duma and the Soviets, central among which were the Bolsheviks (“Ones of the Majority”) led by Vladimir Lenin. He campaigned for an immediate end of Russia’s participation in the Great War (World War I), granting land to the peasants, and providing bread to the urban workers. When the Provisional Government chose to continue fighting the war with Germany, the Bolsheviks and other socialist factions exploited the virtually universal disdain towards the war effort as justification to advance the revolution further. The Bolsheviks turned workers’ militias under their control into the Red Guards (later the Red Army), over which they exerted substantial control.[1]
The situation climaxed with the October Revolution in 1917, a Bolshevik-led armed insurrection by workers and soldiers in Petrograd that successfully overthrew the Provisional Government, transferring all its authority to the Soviets. They soon relocated the national capital to Moscow. The Bolsheviks had secured a strong base of support within the Soviets and, as the supreme governing party, established a federal government dedicated to reorganizing the former empire into the world’s first socialist state, to practice Soviet democracy on a national and international scale. Their promise to end Russia’s participation in the First World War was fulfilled when the Bolshevik leaders signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk with Germany in March 1918. To further secure the new state, the Bolsheviks established the Cheka, a secret police that functioned as a revolutionary security service to weed out, execute, or punish those considered to be “enemies of the people” in campaigns consciously modeled on those
Soon after, civil war erupted among the “Reds” (Bolsheviks), the “Whites” (counter-revolutionaries), the independence movements, and other socialist factions opposed to the Bolsheviks. It continued for several years, during which the Bolsheviks defeated both the Whites and all rival socialists. Victorious, they reconstituted themselves as the Communist Party. They also established Soviet power in the newly independent republics of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia and Ukraine. They brought these jurisdictions into unification under the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) in 1922. While many notable historical events occurred in Moscow and Petrograd, there were also major changes in cities throughout the state, and among national minorities throughout the empire and in the rural areas, where peasants took over and redistributed land.
As the Civil War progressed and dissatisfaction increased within Russian mines, factories and workplaces, there was also disagreement within the Bolshevik party itself. In 1920 a faction emerged within the party, calling itself the Workers’ Opposition. Headed by Alexander Shlyapnikov, a noted trade unionist, this group also enjoyed the support of noted female Bolshevik Alexandra Kollontai. The Workers’ Opposition was not the first group or organisation to show dissent to Bolshevik rule, however their existence prompted a split within the party itself. The emergence of the Workers’ Opposition clearly shows that the Bolshevik policies of 1918-20 were failing to meet the needs of Russian workers.
The Workers’ Opposition consisted mainly of unionists and their chief grievance was that the Soviet economy was becoming over-bureaucratised. The party elites and government departments were dominating decision-making and imposing economic control from above. Policies affecting workers, such as setting difficult production targets and imposing factory discipline, were being made by the government rather than by the workers themselves. Members of the Workers’ Opposition, many of who were syndicalists, considered that the workers, through their trade unions, should have a say in the formulation of economic policy. They also objected to party interference and manipulation of the unions, which they argued should be left to operate freely so that they could protect the interests of workers. Another grievance was the placement of party commissars in factories as ‘spies’, to monitor and report on production.
The 10th Party Congress criticised the Workers’ Opposition for factionalism and a lack of revolutionary discipline. The group’s efforts did have an impact, however, with the party agreeing to concessions and improvements, particularly to the living and working conditions of industrial labourers.
The war was cast by Republican sympathisers as a struggle between tyranny and freedom, and by Nationalist supporters as communist and anarchist “red hordes” versus “Christian civilisation”.[108] Nationalists also claimed they were bringing security and direction to an ungoverned and lawless country.[108] Spanish politics, especially on the left, was quite fragmented, since socialists and communists supported the republic. During the republic, anarchists had mixed opinions, but both major groups opposed the Nationalists during the Civil War. The Nationalists, in contrast, were united by their fervent opposition to the Republican government and presented a more unified front.[109]
Republican and Nationalist conscription age limits
The coup divided the armed forces fairly evenly. One historical estimate suggests that there were some 87,000 troops loyal to the government and some 77,000 joining the insurgency,[110] though some historians suggest that the Nationalist figure should be revised upwards and that it probably amounted to some 95,000.[111]
During the first few months both armies were joined in high numbers by volunteers, Nationalists by some 100,000 men and Republicans by some 120,000.[112] From August both sides launched their own, similarly scaled conscription schemes, resulting in further massive growth of their armies. Finally, the final months of 1936 saw the arrival of foreign troops, International Brigades joining the Republicans and Italian CTV, German Legion Condor and Portuguese Viriatos joining the Nationalists. The result was that in April 1937 there were some 360,000 soldiers in the Republican ranks and some 290,000 in the Nationalist ones.[113]
The armies kept growing. The principal source of manpower was conscription; both sides continued and expanded their schemes, the Nationalists drafting somewhat more aggressively, and there was little room left for volunteering. Foreigners contributed little to further growth; on the Nationalist side the Italians scaled down their engagement, while on the Republican side the influx of new interbrigadistas did not cover losses suffered by these units on the front. At the turn of 1937/1938 both armies achieved numerical parity and equalled about 700,000 each.[114]
Throughout 1938 the principal if not exclusive source of new men was a draft; at this stage it was the Republicans who conscripted more aggressively. In the middle of the year, just prior to the Battle of Ebro, the Republicans achieved their all-time high, commanding an army of slightly above 800,000; this was already no match for the Nationalists, who numbered 880,000.[115] The Battle of Ebro, fall of Catalonia and collapsing discipline produced a massive shrinking of the Republican troops. In late February 1939 their army was 400,000[116] compared to more than double that number of Nationalists. In the moment of their final victory, the latter commanded over 900,000 troops.[117]
The total number of Spaniards serving in the Republican forces was officially stated as 917,000; later scholarly work estimated the number as “well over 1 million men”,[118] though earlier studies claimed a Republican total of 1.75 million (including non-Spaniards).[119] The total number of Spaniards serving in the Nationalist units is estimated at “nearly 1 million men”,[118] though earlier works claimed a total of 1.26 million Nationalists (including non-Spaniards).[120]
regarding State Crimes against democracy, I think Lance Dehavens work and that of Peter Dale Scott is very important. There are Hidden Political Agendas who can seriously dispute that Ted Heath had a hidden agenda in taking the UK into the EU? or that the Eu itself was and has been and continues to be a long-term plan to federalise the European Continent.
Image copyrightTHINKSTOCKImage captionThis man does not like to be disturbed while he’s running the US
A review of the best commentary on and around the world…
Today’s must-read
The US is dominated by a rich and powerful elite.
So concludes a recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page.
This is not news, you say.
Perhaps, but the two professors have conducted exhaustive research to try to present data-driven support for this conclusion. Here’s how they explain it:
Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.
In English: the wealthy few move policy, while the average American has little power.
The two professors came to this conclusion after reviewing answers to 1,779 survey questions asked between 1981 and 2002 on public policy issues. They broke the responses down by income level, and then determined how often certain income levels and organised interest groups saw their policy preferences enacted.
“A proposed policy change with low support among economically elite Americans (one-out-of-five in favour) is adopted only about 18% of the time,” they write, “while a proposed change with high support (four-out-of-five in favour) is adopted about 45% of the time.”
On the other hand:
When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organised interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the US political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favour policy change, they generally do not get it.
They conclude:
Americans do enjoy many features central to democratic governance, such as regular elections, freedom of speech and association and a widespread (if still contested) franchise. But we believe that if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organisations and a small number of affluent Americans, then America’s claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened.
Eric Zuess, writing in Counterpunch, isn’t surprised by the survey’s results.
“American democracy is a sham, no matter how much it’s pumped by the oligarchs who run the country (and who control the nation’s “news” media),” he writes. “The US, in other words, is basically similar to Russia or most other dubious ‘electoral’ ‘democratic’ countries. We weren’t formerly, but we clearly are now.”
This is the “Duh Report”, says Death and Taxes magazine’s Robyn Pennacchia. Maybe, she writes, Americans should just accept their fate.
“Perhaps we ought to suck it up, admit we have a classist society and do like England where we have a House of Lords and a House of Commoners,” she writes, “instead of pretending as though we all have some kind of equal opportunity here.”
As first published in Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung
The easiest way to understand Europe’s financial crisis is to look at the solutions being proposed to resolve it. They are a banker’s dream, a grab bag of giveaways that few voters would be likely to approve in a democratic referendum. Bank strategists learned not to risk submitting their plans to democratic vote after Icelanders twice refused in 2010-11 to approve their government’s capitulation to pay Britain and the Netherlands for losses run up by badly regulated Icelandic banks operating abroad. Lacking such a referendum, mass demonstrations were the only way for Greek voters to register their opposition to the €50 billion in privatization sell-offs demanded by the European Central Bank (ECB) in autumn 2011.
In June 2014, members of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) crossed the border from Syria into northern Iraq, and took control of large swaths of Iraqi territory as the Iraqi Army abandoned its positions. Fighting between rebels and government forces also spilled over into Lebanon on several occasions. There were repeated incidents of sectarian violence in the North Governorate of Lebanon between supporters and opponents of the Syrian government, as well as armed clashes between Sunnis and Alawites in Tripoli.[162]
Starting on 5 June 2014, ISIL seized swathes of territory in Iraq. As of 2014, the Syrian Arab Air Force used airstrikes targeted against ISIL in Raqqa and al-Hasakah in coordination with the Iraqi government.[163]
The scheme referred to in the title involves the driving of “UniVans” from depot to depot picking up and unloading cargo – the cargo being replacement parts for UniVans. “Gloriously self-perpetuating, the scheme was designed to give an honest day’s wage for an honest day’s labour”,[1] “the envy of the world: the greatest undertaking ever conceived by man”. The novel is a satire of labour relations and describes how the scheme is brought to the brink of disaster.
According to aggregated reviews at Complete Review, the novel received mixed reviews with no consensus; the website concluded it was a “decent trifle”.[2]
This is a real problem in this country. In order to repair, which is necessary for both sides ie the victims and the perpetrators, we know that taking full responsibility is absolutely necessary. Without acknowledging the Empire’s terrible deeds, apologising and then making a real effort to “pay back”, nobody can move truly on.
Roger LewisThis debate is pretty intractable as with Holocaust denial what one really needs to do is to make the History accountable. Take the Amritsar massacre for instance portrayed in the Film Gandhi, it happened, and the film is a British Cinema classic. There is a responsibility to acknowledge facts but the responsibility where the power to affect events has passed does not extend to generational Guilt. History should teach us but to be punished for it or guilt-tripped for it is absurd. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=345aojByoGk
Leo Garib Thank you for your excellent comment and post, Kat Boettge.
As you correctly point out, acknowledging the atrocities of the British empire isn’t just about purging the past because millions are still living with the empire – including ourselves in Brexit Britian.
Hannah Arendt, the great post-war philosopher, argued cogently in Responsibility and Judgement against future German generations feeling guilt when they were innocent of the actions:
“Morally speaking, it is as wrong to feel guilty without having done anything specific as it is to feel free of all guilt if one actually is guilty of something. I have always regarded it as the quintessence of moral confusion that during the postwar period in Germany those who personally were completely innocent assured each other and the world at large how guilty they felt, while very few of the criminals were prepared to admit even the slightest remorse.”
But the British empire is still part of our lives, still shapes our culture and determines our policies.
Britain continues to be a major imperialist country, intervening indirectly through corruption and directly through war. Brexit was based on the national chauvinism which empire and its cultural corollary supremacism has engendered. The very first act of Theresa May’s government was to reaffirm its alignment with the US and Trump in particular, while other EU countries stood back aghast. Now we heat that Whitehall wits have dubbed the government’s post-Brexit trade plans in Africa as ‘Empire 2.0’. I think it was irony.
Roger Lewis To somehow equate Brexit voting as racist or neo-colonialist/imperialist is absurd. The EU is itself imperialist, and elitist it is nonsense to foist a political ideology held by a government in power to the motives of an electorate, it simply does not stand up to logical examination. It also presupposes that Governments pay any attention to electorates in general. It is the Elites of any society that manipulates the population, populations are victims of states as much as the unfortunate countries subjected to mercantilist imperial exploitation.
By Peter Hitchens Logic and I agree with Him, Theresa May is Stalinist, where that leaves Corbyn I really do not know.
I had a crack at figuring it out in this video.
Stalin´s Idea of Subsidiarity and Proportionality according to krushev.
When Stalin Died Krushev denounced him, Brexit is an analogue for the denunciation of the EU (Stalin) yet the EU is still alive or though diminished. I quote the passage in Krushevs´ Speech as it deals with Stalins´ treatment of the Yugoslav crisis.
One can draw one´s own conclusions, but I draw parallels to Putin, To Syria to the Ukraine and of course the Slovenian debt crisis of a few years back. ´´Once as Tragedy and then as Farce´´ Indeed. The parallels to the Errancy of the UK, by some measures and rhetoric, are startling.
Speech Delivered: February 24-25 1956;
At the Twentieth Congress of the CPSU February 24-25 1956, Khrushchev delivered a report in which he denounced Stalin’s crimes and the ‘cult of personality’ surrounding Stalin. This speech would ultimately trigger a world-wide split:
It is clear that the creation within the Politbiuro of this type of commissions – “quintets,” “sextets,” “septets” and “nonets” – was against the principle of collective leadership. The result of this was that some members of the Politbiuro were in this way kept away from participation in reaching the most important state matters.
One of the oldest members of our Party, Klimenty Yefremovich Voroshilov, found himself in an almost impossible situation. For several years he was actually deprived of the right of participation in Politbiuro sessions. Stalin forbade him to attend Politbiuro sessions and to receive documents. When the Politbiuro was in session and comrade Voroshilov heard about it, he telephoned each time and asked whether he would be allowed to attend. Sometimes Stalin permitted it, but always showed his dissatisfaction.
Because of his extreme suspicion, Stalin toyed also with the absurd and ridiculous suspicion that Voroshilov was an English agent.
(Laughter in the hall.)
It’s true – an English agent. A special tap was installed in his home to listen to what was said there.
(Indignation in the hall.)
By unilateral decision, Stalin had also separated one other man from the work of the Politbiuro – Andrey Andreyevich Andreyev. This was one of the most unbridled acts of willfulness.
Looking at the experiences of different countries under the European Union Enlargement since Maastricht and the Political tourniquets applied ever tighter since Lisbon and one sees all of the Failings of Stalinist Five-year plans and a sort of Lysenkoism regarding their efficacy
A doubling down on the insistence upon an elite narrative of Ideal reality which simply could never become the Picture of any objective observer.
Image copyrightPA MEDIAImage captionChief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis has pastoral oversight of half the UK Jewish community
The Chief Rabbi has strongly criticised Labour, claiming the party is not doing enough to root out anti-Jewish racism – and asked people to “vote with their conscience” in the general election.
In the Times, Ephraim Mirvis said “a new poison – sanctioned from the very top – has taken root” in the party.
Labour’s claim it had investigated all cases of anti-Semitism in its ranks was a “mendacious fiction”, he added.
Jeremy Corbyn says Labour is tackling anti-Semitism by expelling members.
Media captionTony Blair: ‘This election is the weirdest in my lifetime’.
Former Prime Minister Tony Blair has said the UK is a “mess”, with politics “utterly dysfunctional” ahead of the general election.
The ex-Labour leader said a majority government for either his party or the Conservatives would “pose a risk”.
Both main parties, led by Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn, were “peddling two sets of fantasies”, he said.
The election was the “weirdest in my lifetime”, Mr Blair added, but he said he would vote Labour on 12 December.
In their manifesto, the Conservatives say that, if they win a parliamentary majority they will get Brexit” done and then “focus our hearts and minds on the priorities of the British people”.
There are two parts of the proposed compensation: one for the changes made in 1995, when it was decided that the state pension age for women should increase from 60 to 65, and one for the changes in 2011 when the increase to 65 was accelerated and an increase to 66 was scheduled.
The chart below shows how the 1995 and 2011 compensation combines to give a total up to the maximum £31,300.
Consider, for example:
Late-night round-up
What’s happened today?
We’re wrapping things up for the night, so here’s a quick look back at some of the main events today:
Plaid Cymru’s Adam Price struck a similar note in his BBC interview, saying he wants Wales to rejoin the EU as an independent country if the UK leaves
Boris Johnson tried his hand at shearing a sheep as he launched the Conservatives’ Welsh manifesto – promising additional investment for the nation
The Liberal Democrats unveiled their foreign policy plans, criticising Boris Johnson for aligning with “right-wing, authoritarian nationalists” on the world stage
Labour promised to bring in rent controls and “put bad landlords out of business” if it wins power
Former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair said politics is “utterly dysfunctional” with parties “peddling two sets of fantasies” but added he will still vote Labour
Channel 4 said its hour-long climate debate on Thursday will go ahead “with or without” Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage, who have not yet responded to the invitation
And nearly three million people have applied to register to vote in the past month, according to Government figures
This analysis from Lord Ashcroft is excellent Tim. The Focus Group write-ups are also highly entertaining and very informative for slices of the mood music of the mundane the ordinary and Precarious lives of the Left Behind Fly over cannon fodder of Neo-Liberal Elitism.
And a Word on FIllial rivalry from Peter Hitchins.
“The last thing that Peter and I agreed on was the impeachment of President Clinton. But this is not simply a political-party difference. These things rarely are. In England, for instance, Sir Charles Powell is an eminent figure. He first rose to fame as a foreign-policy adviser to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. His younger brother Jonathan Powell is chief of staff to Prime Minister Tony Blair. But many people do not even know that they are related, because they resolutely decline to pronounce the family name in the same way. Sir Charles prefers to say it so as to rhyme with “pole,” the slightly affected form that was also insisted upon by that supreme novelist of the English elite, Anthony Powell. Young Jonathan, perhaps more the man of the people, chooses to do what most readers of the name would do, rhyme it with “towel.” I know for a fact that one political-summit trip meant that the brotherly duo had to board the same official aircraft. This did not mean, however, that they had to exchange a single word with each other.
The Poleists and Towelists have nothing on the Hitchenses.”
A favourite novel of mine is the Scheme for Full Employment, it is Dry Kafkaesque absurdism done at it’s best. There are two Factions, The Work to Rulers and Early Swervers, both factions are engaged in an Enterprise of the circular manufacture and dismantling of UNI Vans. Its an Allegory of some sort I would be interested if anyone else has read it. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/325602.The_Scheme_For_Full_Employment
How Interesting to compare, Jo Johnstone and his Brother Boris, Piers Corbyn and His Brother Jeremy, Ed Milliband and his brother David, perhaps some Father-Son lineage might also prove informative, Tony Benn, Hilary Ben, Neil Kinnock Stephen Kinnock, George Bush 1 George Bush the Second.
I noticed this morning that Channel 4 will be screening a leaders debate on “Climate” this coming Thursday, Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage will apparently not be taking part? I think I will tune in and as a bit of fun, I might pre-write the script and publish before the show goes out to see how accurate I am.
“…Edward describes, it suggests that my late brother’s attitude towards the Soviet experiment was more, er, nuanced than he might later have wished to acknowledge. Of course he was not a Stalinist, the charge which he angrily denied, though I had not made it. He was a Trotskyist, first as a member of a Trotskyist grouplet and later as an admirer (as he states clearly here) of Trotsky himself, see https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0076zht
(This, by the way, was recorded in August 2006).
But in my experience, quite a lot of Trotskyists (and he was definitely one of those) still defended aspects of the Soviet experiment, as Trotsky did himself. I was keenly aware of this as, even in my most fervent Trotskyist phase, I could never bring myself to see anything good about the USSR, and once got into trouble with my International Socialist comrades for issuing at the University of York (above the IS imprint) a leaflet saying that the Soviet Union was ‘no more socialist than Surrey’.
“A fiction that elevates my soul is dearer to me than a host of base and despicable truths”. Pushkin.
p.117-9.126
Chapter I
Ignorance is Strength
Throughout recorded time, and probably since the end of the Neolithic Age,
there have been three kinds of people in the world, the High, the Middle, and
117
the Low. They have been subdivided in many ways, they have borne countless
different names, and their relative numbers, as well as their attitude towards
one another, have varied from age to age: but the essential structure of society
has never altered. Even after enormous upheavals and seemingly irrevocable
1. MONEY AND PLAN. We have attempted to examine the Soviet regime in the cross-section of the state. We can make a similar examination in the cross-section of currency. These two problems, state and money, have a number of traits in common, for they both reduce themselves in the last analysis to the problem of problems: productivity of labor. State compulsion like money compulsion is an inheritance from the class society, which is incapable of defining the relations of man to man except in the form of fetishes, churchly or secular, after appointing to defend them the most alarming of all fetishes, the state, with a great knife between its teeth. In a communist society, the state and money will disappear. Their gradual dying away ought consequently to begin under socialism. We shall be able to speak of the actual triumph of socialism only at that historical moment when the state turns into a semistate, and money begins to lose its magic power. This will mean that socialism, having freed itself from capitalist fetishes, is beginning to create a more lucid, free and worthy relation among men. Such characteristically anarchist demands as the “abolition” of money, “abolition” of wages, or “liquidation” of the state and family, possess interest merely as models of mechanical thinking. Money cannot be arbitrarily “abolished”, nor the state and the old family “liquidated.” They have to exhaust their historic mission, evaporate, and fall away. The deathblow to money
Salience, Relevance, Differentiation and The Polling Booth point of sale The NHS, Fairness, Immigration & People, Brexit and an end to Austerity. Are the Relevant and Salient issues I get from the Data. Applying An analysis with the lens of Lynton Crosby’s 4 Elements in Campaigning, Namely; 1. Salience, ( Is it out there) 2. …Continue readingSalience, Relevance, Differentiation and The Polling Booth , A Crosby Show Blogzine.
The Lytton Crosby Campaigning Hierarchy of Voter Needs?
As with 1993 for Kinnock this Election Is Boris Johnson’s to Lose, Just as May totally screwed up 2017, Johnson quite possibly did a Kinnock with this Moment on question Time. Analysis to Follow over the next few days.
#SAM thread Take back control Waspis and Brexiteers must hold the BOJO feet to the fire. Insurance…
The People cannot win this General Election….but they can triumph in Broxtowe #4Pamphleteers @GrubStreetJorno @Survation @wiki_ballot @financialeyes @DavidGolemXIV #WIKIBALLOTPICK #IABATO #SA…
notthegrubstreetjournal.com
Wiki_Ballot@wiki_ballot
Replying to @MaryDenise22 @cheryl_english
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000bx5j/question-time-2019-leaders-special … from 1.27
Gabbers my dear old thing:
1. Ever considered the wacky possibility that there’s a correlation in my case between ‘intelligent’ and ‘right’? Just a thought.
2. Labour launches Manifesto. No surge.
3. Even the Observer’s Opinium poll admits: Boris launches Tory manifesto – surges. Gap between Tory & Labour now 47-28….19 points.
4. Labour’s support level NOWHERE NEAR what it was at this stage in 2017.
5. Tories have a good stump electioneering leader as opposed to serially odd robot.
6. Labour has 2x as many unsure voters as Tories.
7. All local polls show massive swing against Labour.
So there’s the Magnificent Seven facts, Gabriel. Now as a change from YOU asking me whyohwhyohwhy, why don’t you type a response that defies those facts with evidence?
JW
2010 General election. Cameron Beats Brown. Cameron is an EU Federalist and the Heir to Blair, so far so NWO.
At 10 pm on election day, coinciding with the closure of the polls, the results of an exit poll collected for the BBC, Sky and ITV news services were announced. Data were gathered from individuals at 130 polling stations around the country. The results of the poll initially suggested a hung parliament with the Conservative Party 19 seats from a controlling majority; this was later adjusted to 21 seats. The distribution of seats amongst the Conservatives, Labour, Liberal Democrats and other parties was initially suggested to be 307, 255, 59 and 29 respectively,[8] although the seat numbers were later changed to 303, 251, 69, and 27 respectively.[9]
Initial reaction to the exit poll by various commentators was of surprise at the apparent poor prospects for the Liberal Democrats[10] because it was odds with many opinion polls undertaken in the previous weeks. However, the actual results showed that the exit poll was a good predictor.
A later BBC Exit poll (05:36 BST) predicted the Conservatives on 306, 20 short of an overall majority, Labour on 262, and Liberal Democrats on 55.[9]
The following graph shows ICM poll results since the last general election. Results for Conservative are in Blue, Labour in Red, Liberal Democrat Gold and Others in Grey. Other polling houses may show different results, and all polls are subject to a margin of error and possible house bias.
The following graph shows YouGov poll results since the calling of the general election.
The following graph shows ComRes poll results recorded over the period April 11 – May 6, 2010, including annotations of the three TV debates.
Poll results are initially listed in reverse chronological order showing the most recent first, using the date the fieldwork was done, as opposed to the date of publication.
The figure given in the ‘lead’ column before the televised leaders’ debates is the lead held by Labour or the Conservatives over the second placed of the two parties. For figures after the first debate, after which the Liberal Democrats were placed in first or second position in some polls, the second placed party is also noted in the column where applicable.
Most of the polling companies listed are members of the British Polling Council, and abide by its disclosure rules. BPIX is not a member of the BPC, and does not publish detailed methodology and findings.
Cameron Beats Milliband. NWO Tory Boy Blair Cameron Project beat the Wrong Milliband, David Milliband was the UN NWO World Globalist Internationalis Pick, His Brother was more of Purple tory to much of a mix of red and Blue.
Throughout the 55th parliament of the United Kingdom, first and second place in the polls without exception alternated between the Conservatives and Labour. Labour took a lead in the polls in the second half of 2010, driven in part by a collapse in Liberal Democrat support.[132] This lead rose to approximately 10 points over the Conservative Party during 2012, whose ratings dipped alongside an increase in UKIP support.[133] UKIP passed the Liberal Democrats as the third-most popular party at the start of 2013. Following this, Labour’s lead over the Conservatives began to fall as UKIP gained support from it as well,[134] and by the end of the year Labour were polling at 39%, compared to 33% for the Conservative Party and 11% for UKIP.[134]
jaslong
5 hours ago
Can someone explain why we are so low at the moment? I cant identify or find a single cause? Trump? its January? News? any thoughts?
rogerglewis13 1 min ago
any significant movement through major adoption will show up here https://www.cmegroup.com/trading/equity-index/us-index/bitcoin.html for now the BTC whales including financial players from Central and commercial banks are using the space as a play thing. The Market Cap of the whole crypto space is pocket change for the fed balance sheet .
Google The National Debt and Federal Budget Deficit Deconstructed – Tony Robbins and watch the video
123
statistics show that it’s up to a
04:25
hundred and seventeen trillion dollars
04:27
so how long would a trillion seconds ago
04:31
a bit again a million is twelve days ago
Prime Minister Gordon Brown of the United Kingdom did not take part in the main ceremony, and instead signed the treaty separately a number of hours after the other delegates. A requirement to appear before a committee of British MPs was cited as the reason for his absence. The signing of the Treaty of Lisbon took place in Lisbon, Portugal on 13 December 2007.
KNOWN OUTCOMES OF LISBON TREATY THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN AGREED AS TRUE BY ALL SIDES:
1: The UK along with all existing members of the EU lose their abstention veto in 2020 as laid down in the Lisbon Treaty when the system changes to that of majority acceptance with no abstentions or veto’s being allowed.
2: All member nations will become states of the new federal nation of the EU by 2022 as clearly laid out in the Lisbon treaty with no exceptions or veto’s.
3: All member states must adopt the Euro by 2022 and any new member state must do so within 2 years of joining the EU as laid down in the Lisbon treaty.
4: The London stock exchange will move to Frankfurt in 2020 and be integrated into the EU stock exchange resulting in a loss of 200,000 plus jobs in the UK because of the relocation. (This has already been pre-agreed and is only on a holding pattern due to the Brexit negotiations, which if Brexit does happen, the move is fully cancelled – but if not and the UK remains a member it’s full steam ahead for the move.)
5: The EU Parliament and ECJ become supreme over all legislative bodies of the UK
6: The UK will adopt 100% of whatever the EU Parliament and ECJ lays down without any means of abstention or veto, negating the need for the UK to have the Lords or even the Commons as we know it today.
7: The UK will NOT be able to make its own trade deals.
8: The UK will NOT be able to set its own trade tariffs.
9: The UK will NOT be able to set its own trade quotas.
10: The UK loses control of its fishing rights
11: The UK loses control of its oil and gas rights
12: The UK loses control of its borders and enters the Schengen region by 2022 – as clearly laid down in the Lisbon treaty
13: The UK loses control of its planning legislation
14: The UK loses control of its armed forces including its nuclear deterrent
15: The UK loses full control of its taxation policy
16: The UK loses the ability to create its own laws and to implement them
17: The UK loses its standing in the Commonwealths
18: The UK loses control of any provinces or affiliated nations e.g.: Falklands, Cayman Islands, Gibraltar etc
19: The UK loses control of its judicial system
20: The UK loses control of its international policy
21: The UK loses full control of its national policy
22: The UK loses its right to call itself a nation in its own right.
23: The UK loses control of its space exploration program
24: The UK loses control of its Aviation and Sea lane jurisdiction
25: The UK loses its rebate in 2020 as laid down in the Lisbon treaty
26: The UK’s contribution to the EU is set to increase by an average of 1.2bn pa and by 2.3bn pa by 2020
With thanks to ‘UK in a Changing Europe’ and Professor Steve Peers for their help .
Such change has been presented as being in the interests of ‘modernising’ or ‘increasing efficiences,’ yet the wasteful expenditure of taxpayer’s money on questionable projects in previous decades has been exceptionally high. In addition historical allegiences are being increasingly strained.
Something about women pensioners being robbed by the government.
WASPI ALERT: as long as ethical knuckle-draggers with birdbrain logic can tweet rubbish about the…
The moronically divisive tweet above appeared on Twitter over the weekend. Mr Groves (who looks on his homepage like a 40-something) could be forgiven…..if it wasn’t clear that he is &#…
THE SATURDAY ESSAY: Cheated Waspi pensioners are paying for 50 years of incompetence, not UK…
Unless the political class is made to face its responsibilities to the vulnerable, the eventual revenge could be socially devastating. Whiteminster needs a good kicking now to avoid destabilising …
Tally Ho Ginger! I’m going in. Never let it be said I don’t do requests, so I’ll start off gently with some nice Beatles lyrics. Doing the garden, digging the weeds Who could ask …
Putting the fundamental pension contract at the heart of our macroeconomy
Yesterday’s stock market turmoil, whatever its long term impact, hints at a much bigger problem than a simple over valuation of Chinese shares needing adjustment. It is also a bigger issue than our…
Do they want you to vote? GE2019 via @YouTube #TwoFingers2Brino @wiki_ballot #4Pamphleteers @GrubStreetJorno @Survation @wiki_ballot @financialeyes #WIKIBALLOTPICK #IABATO #SAM #GE2019 Roger Lewis ( Porthos) @JoeBlob20 mentions Home – BBC NewsVisit BBC News for up-to-the-minute news, breaking news, video, audio and feature stories. BBC News provides trusted World and UK news as well as local and regional perspectives. Also entertainment, …https://www.bbc.com/news mentions If all the non-voters actually voted, what could …
The Scandic Model, Carl Bilt and the assassinations of Olof Palme and Jo Cox, amongst others? Sweden is being herded into the US Exceptionalism/NWO camp, Palme was in the Trotskyist Camp?
Laizez Faire American Exceptionalism, Nixon, Trump, JFK?
US Exceptionalism, Imperialist NWO BUSH/Cheney EUFederalist and (NATO?) Axis
UN NWO ELite Exceptionalism, Stalinist Serfdom Clinton/Obama
UN Globalist Trotskyism, Corbyn, Sanders
Netanyahu/ Wihabbi/ Moslem Brotherhood Faction aligned to US Exceptionalist Zionist Imperialism.
The Queen,
The Common Wealth
Trump/Benedict Arnold ( Marrying the wrong Woman)
Jackson
Prince Andrew, Prince Harry, Prince William and Prince Charles
Edward and Mrs Simpson
The 3rd Reich, The Abdication and Plans for the Occupation of the United Kingdom
Irish Neutrality?
Deutsche bank.
ECB economists will admit it only after the ECB has completed its programme of destroying the German community banks and German financial system, as well as people’s lifetime savings. https://t.co/ifKEw61RTW
“The logic here is that the world economy is now in such a parlous state that it can no longer afford the sums previously put aside by savers, but has to channel all output into consumption in order to keep the ship afloat.”
Neil Wilson says:
August 26 2015 at 7:07 am
“”It’s the secondary sale of tokens that funds the pension scheme.
If I hold Token X as a pension saving, when I retire I sell a Token X to somebody who is currently saving for a pension, and then I spend the money the other person has saved. The income from all the Token X’s I stlll hold plus the ones I’ve just effectively sold to somebody else is what forms a pension in payment.
In other words the money I spend as retirement income comes from somebody else who thinks they are saving for a pension. In reality Token X is just held by a pension company and they change the notional ownership in a database somewhere, depending how nominalised the investment pool is.
Essentially the person saving is ‘taxed’ (increasingly so since we now have ‘compulsory pension savings’) so that the retiree can receive an income. All the Token X holding bit is a charade to make the private sector think they’re doing something useful.
You’d get exactly the same effect if you just put up income tax, scrapped all the pension saving and increased the retirement pension (and made it graduated to reflect earnings).
Then all the pension middlemen can be let go and go off to relieve the skills shortage the CBI is always moaning about.
Pensions are always a current production issue. How much of current production should be reserved for people who have not been involved in creating it today, but have bequeathed a public investment pool by which the current production can occur.””
That comment from Neil Wilson, I think probably my favourite MMT’er and challenging Richard Murphy, with whom I have some strong disagreements over the Green New deal with. sets the limits on what Pension Saving really represents under the Fiancialised View of the Dismal Science.
Here in a supposedly energy Savvy DIscussion community, I would expect the discourse to be rather more advanced with its prescriptions for the ailments to follow the coming sickness in the aged and likely terminal Patient of the Debt-based dollar hegemon.
The Economic System, The Financial System and the Economy are separate even within the financialised Economic Regime currently crumbling, and under which we all persevere. Of course, the World Economy is an Energy system and is Resource-Based. The Energy, the resources and the demand remains exactly as they were the day after a financial collapse as they were the day before. the only thing that changes is the ability to communicate and express that demand through the Financial media at our disposal.
The bourgeoisie and narrow viewpoint adopted in the chattering classes regarding our own interface with the Lived day to day experience of the “reality-based” pantomime does not change the fact that the headlines are not the News and are certainly nothing to do with daily life and the potential that exists with all the tools at our Individual and community networks.
I really do feel that when a more clued up blog and discussion group like this lapses back into the formulaic and hackneyed language of “Unfunded Pension provision” without blushing at the vacuous circularity of such a statement, we should after sharing the Joke dig a little deeper and try a little harder to practise that which we preach. When, supposedly, it is obvious to those of us regulars here that the Economy is, in fact, an energy transformation system, we can expect very little better from the clowns who are supposed to be running the show, if we ourselves do not apply our own insights to all aspects of the system in a more vigorous manner.
The surface of politics as presented to us as an electorate absolutely does not reveal the infrastructure around the UN and the NGO infrastructures surrounding what is revealed is a fraction of what is really happening in terms of continuity global governance. With respect to gaming elections, the Kinnock Rally in Sheffield all those years ago was a Clinton camp operation and of course, the cross-fertilisation has only deepened since then. Then, of course, there is this
James is a fairly unpleasant chap based upon his writing yet the truth of the unpleasantness of The Higher-ups is fairly well documented albeit memory-holed
James, as I said, is it seems a particularly virulent antisemite and quoting him would seem less than wise. The English-Celtic Struggle Against The Ridiculously Laughable Serpent Race
The Interview of Shrimpton by Allen is worth listening too only in that I believe them both to be Wrong and yet pissing in the general direction of the correct lamp posts.
On 25 June, as part of the IPU’s 130th anniversary celebrations, the Chair and Executive Committee of the British Group Inter-Parliamentary Union (BGIPU) invited members of the House of Commons and the House of Lords to attend a diplomatic reception in Speaker’s House. Members of the Diplomatic Corps, key stakeholders in the UK Parliament and a visiting delegation from the Italian Parliament were also invited (Italy was one of the nine original member countries of the IPU, along with the co-founders United Kingdom and France).
Vaclav Smil is an old favourite on this Blog and his work has figured in many discussions over the years with various Green SJWs in the CLimate Cult religion. This June Lecture, Smil’s JP Morgan Report above and some highlights from Smil’s Blog, A reader on All things Energy and Embodied energy.
Click the Link Below and please read this book, written by a Physicist, Engineer and sadly now departed all round good egg Prof. Sir David MacKay. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_J._C._MacKay
So I can get back to my own number crunching I have made my blogging task easier by leaving what I find pertinent links to the question at the Surplus Energy Economics Blog of Dr Tim Morgan, ( Sorry Tim) Here are the two Blogs and Attachments concerned:
The Book is an easy read and the examples are very intuitive as they break back to the idea of how many 40 watt light bulbs different energy solutions break down as in per capita energy resources.
There are some very good Sites which have well-embedded energy databases particularly in the Construction industry which uses 48% of global energy annually building and running domestic and commercial property.
http://symposium.arch.tamu.edu/2017/ Project Summary: Buildings consume approximately 48% of global energy each year in their construction and operation alone adding proportionally to global carbon emission.
The problems in Political Economy as it stands presently and the question of future Political Economy based upon future Energy realities are I think helpfully separated which is something Prof. David MacKay is very successful with, in his presentation of the question.
Vaclav Smil does interdisciplinary research in the fields of energy, environmental and population change, food production and nutrition, technical innovation, risk assessment, and public policy. He has published 40 books and nearly 500 papers on these topics. He is a Distinguished Professor Emeritus at the University of Manitoba and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada (Science Academy). In 2010 he was named by Foreign Policy as one of the top 100 global thinkers and in 2013 he was appointed as a Member of the Order of Canada. He has worked as a consultant for many US, EU and international institutions, has been an invited speaker in more than 400 conferences and workshops in the USA, Canada, Europe, Asia and Africa, and has lectured at many universities in North America, Europe and East Asia. His wife Eva is a physician and his son David is an organic chemist.
Smil’s History of Energy and Civilisation is a must read, I have re-read it over the past day.
Smil’s work is assiduously empirical and what he says is worth very serious consideration.
Why is “less” so bad?
From Vaclav Smil (Energy at the Crossroads, 2003, MIT press) (emphases in bold are mine, those in italics are the author’s).
“what is called for is a moderation of demand so that the affluent western nations would reduce their extraordinarily high per capita energy consumption not just by 10% or 15% but by at least 24-35%. Such reductions would call for nothing more than a return to levels that prevailed just a decade or no more than a generation ago. How could one even use the term sacrifice in this connection? Did we live so unbearably 10 or 30 years ago that the return to those consumption levels cannot be even contemplated by serious policymakers because they feel, I fear correctly, that the public would find such a suggestion unthinkable and utterly unacceptable?
[…]
“would the billions of today’s poor people be distressed when a generation from now they could experience the quality of life that was enjoyed by people in Lyon or Kyoto during the 1960s?”
…I will ask any European reader … having a good recollection of the 1960s, this simple question: what was so unbearable about life in that decade? What is so precious that we have gained since that time through our much-increased energy use that we seem to be unwilling even to contemplate a return to those levels of fuel and electricity consumption?”
[from pages 338 and 353 of the 2005 edition]
I extracted some of the more prominent pieces from Energy and Civilisation into a blog for my own notes for a couple of projects they are relevant to.
Ayres, Ayres, and Warr (2003) identified the declining price of useful
work as the growth engine of the U.S. economy during the twentieth
century, useful work being the product of exergy (the maximum work possible
in an ideal energy conversion process) and conversion efficiency. Once the
historical data of economic output are normalized (with GDP values
expressed in constant, inflation-adjusted monies and with the national
products used to calculate GWP given in terms of purchasing power parity
rather than by using official exchange rates), impressively strong long-term
correlations between economic growth and energy use emerge on both
global and national levels.
Between 1900 and 2000 the use of all primary energy (after subtracting
processing losses and nonfuel uses of fossil fuels) rose nearly eightfold, from
44 to 382 EJ, and the GWP increased more than 18 times, from about $2
trillion to nearly $37 trillion in constant 1990 monies (Smil 2010a; Maddi-
son Project 2013), implying an elasticity of less than 0.5. High correlations
of the two variables can be found for a single country over time, but the
elasticities differ: during the twentieth century, the Japanese GDP increased
52-fold and total energy use rose 50-fold (an elasticity very close to 1.0),
while the multiples for the United States were, respectively, nearly 10-fold
and 25-fold (an elasticity of less than 0.4), and for China nearly 13-fold and
20-fold (an elasticity of 0.6 )
Many of the catastrophists who tend to comment here seem to do so in a vacuum which allows an ignorance of rather a lot of Empirical data which falsifies their eschatological claims.
Originally posted on Not The Grub Street Journal:
A very Good deal of progress made towards exploring Energy and Entropy in Economics and the Psossibilities of Political Economy without Debt Based Money and a presumption of scarcity. VACLAV SMIL 273 How restrictive are natural factors? Photosynthetic productivity depends on the availability of solar radiation, atmospheric…
scribd.com/document/284513941/Ecological-Complexity#fullscreen&from_embed February 2, 2019 at 1:23 pm Reply Your comment is awaiting moderation. “The upper output rate boundary occurs when all the effort available for tool making and maintenance is fully committed to maintaining the tools already in use; no further effort is available to make more.” Take this part here frank which I think …Continue readingResponse to Frank Slater, held in Moderation.
What Caroline Lucas can do about the Green vote collapse June 27, 2017rogerglewisEdit“What Caroline Lucas can do about the Green vote collapse” An interesting critique of the Presidential Style of the Lucas Bartley Regime at the Green Party. Green Citizens’ Basic Income Did the Progressive Alliance cause the 55% slump in 2017 Green votes as …Continue readingWhat Caroline Lucas can do about the Green vote collapse
https://www.bitchute.com/embed/XikjAJ4yeLXv/ Authentic Discourses on Decisions to Act. A golden Rule in folklores Canon holds what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the Gander do unto others that which to you would be done thus applied in discussion, we should always avoid slander. Leave at the first introduction the habits of Authority and induction When …Continue reading
123 Why Money is such a bad metric for Energy investment decisions. EROI, Towards an Energy-Based Economics. More Notes from the Digital Coalface. This is a notebook post of discussions on and critiques of Energy generation replacement solutions for when Oil / Gas and Coal Run out? The basis of our calculations are best informed …Continue readingRenewables,EROI Why Money Doesn´t cut it when making Energy Investment Decisions!
Globalisation Un-Entangled. (Work in Progress, Danger Poet at Work) shadows cast from secret whispers, taps on streams of digital Imprints what oppressor does not despise what oppression will not censor and misdirectSecretive cabals of liberal political correctness Self-censored fearing the exile of dissentGchq Nsa Kvd , hacking whos democracyWhat democracy, sings with the voice of explosions Tripartate accords …Continue readingGlobalisation Un-Entangled. #conquestofdough #regardeur/Tableaux. MEME POETRY IN THE MAKING
Posts navigation
FOr confirmation Bias in action see comments section of the following.
“The logic here is that the world economy is now in such a parlous state that it can no longer afford the sums previously put aside by savers, but has to channel all output into consumption in order to keep the ship afloat.”
Neil Wilson says:
August 26 2015 at 7:07 am
“”It’s the secondary sale of tokens that funds the pension scheme.
If I hold Token X as a pension saving, when I retire I sell a Token X to somebody who is currently saving for a pension, and then I spend the money the other person has saved. The income from all the Token X’s I stlll hold plus the ones I’ve just effectively sold to somebody else is what forms a pension in payment.
In other words the money I spend as retirement income comes from somebody else who thinks they are saving for a pension. In reality Token X is just held by a pension company and they change the notional ownership in a database somewhere, depending how nominalised the investment pool is.
Essentially the person saving is ‘taxed’ (increasingly so since we now have ‘compulsory pension savings’) so that the retiree can receive an income. All the Token X holding bit is a charade to make the private sector think they’re doing something useful.
You’d get exactly the same effect if you just put up income tax, scrapped all the pension saving and increased the retirement pension (and made it graduated to reflect earnings).
Then all the pension middlemen can be let go and go off to relieve the skills shortage the CBI is always moaning about.
Pensions are always a current production issue. How much of current production should be reserved for people who have not been involved in creating it today, but have bequeathed a public investment pool by which the current production can occur.””
That comment from Neil Wilson, I think probably my favourite MMT’er and challenging Richard Murphy, with whom I have some strong disagreements over the Green New deal with. sets the limits on what Pension Saving really represents under the Fiancialised View of the Dismal Science.
Here in a supposedly energy Savvy DIscussion community, I would expect the discourse to be rather more advanced with its prescriptions for the ailments to follow the coming sickness in the aged and likely terminal Patient of the Debt-based dollar hegemon.
The Economic System, The Financial System and the Economy are separate even within the financialised Economic Regime currently crumbling, and under which we all persevere. Of course, the World Economy is an Energy system and is Resource-Based. The Energy, the resources and the demand remains exactly as they were the day after a financial collapse as they were the day before. the only thing that changes is the ability to communicate and express that demand through the Financial media at our disposal.
The bourgeoisie and narrow viewpoint adopted in the chattering classes regarding our own interface with the Lived day to day experience of the “reality-based” pantomime does not change the fact that the headlines are not the News and are certainly nothing to do with daily life and the potential that exists with all the tools at our Individual and community networks.
I really do feel that when a more clued up blog and discussion group like this lapses back into the formulaic and hackneyed language of “Unfunded Pension provision” without blushing at the vacuous circularity of such a statement, we should after sharing the Joke dig a little deeper and try a little harder to practise that which we preach. When, supposedly, it is obvious to those of us regulars here that the Economy is, in fact, an energy transformation system, we can expect very little better from the clowns who are supposed to be running the show, if we ourselves do not apply our own insights to all aspects of the system in a more vigorous manner.
There is an online book here,
http://www.withouthotair.com/Contents.html
He talks about the book here at Harvard,